Good Writing Advice: Be Not Verbose

Verbosity: Too Many Verbs?

Never write things down on paper - or on other stuff, like cardboard boxes, for instance, or on rocks or in the sand, or even on computer screens - in a very verbose sort of way that wastes the time of readers, who probably have a lot of better things to do in order to occupy their time, but you, instead, you, rather, you yourself should be extremely concise in all of the written words that you scatter across a page, or that, rather, you scatter across the surfaces of any of the other stuff mentioned above, because a lot of people don't like to take advice, not even from reputable sources, since even the reputable sources, like me (but trust me), can be corrupted or lose focus and forget the issue under consideration, which was (I think) something about the necessity of being ridiculously articulate.

Some Unrecognizable Forbidden Image of Some Unknown Somebody or Other

Sowing Seeds of Light
(Not Really Mohammad)

Memri
Mohammad Sabaaneh's Cartoon
Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, PA
February 1, 2015

I'm ever again surprised when the editors of a Muslim news source publish an image even purported to be of Muhammad - as though they don't realize that Islam forbids images of Muhammad! The Shia branch of Islam has often depicted images of Muhammad, of course, but I thought that Sunni Muslims didn't and that they would even avoid even seeming to, so I was surprised to see the Memri report for February 3, 2015 (Inquiry and Analysis Series, Report No. 1142), by R. Green, "In Palestinian Authority, Outrage Follows PA Daily's Publication Of Muhammad Cartoon," even if the image is merely interpreted to be of Muhammad. I was not alone in my surprise:

On February 1, 2015, the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida published a cartoon by illustrator Mohammad Sabaaneh of a man with a heart-shaped shoulder bag standing in an aura of light atop the Earth and scattering droplets of light. The cartoon is titled "Our Master Muhammad" in Arabic and "Prophet Muhammad" in English.

As is well-known, Islamic law forbids any depiction whatsoever of the Prophet Muhammad or of any other prophet.

But apparently not known well enough for even Sunni Muslims to avoid even seeming to depict Muhammad!

The publication of the cartoon in a newspaper belonging to the Palestinian Authority (PA) sparked an uproar. The daily quickly removed the cartoon from its website and deleted the page from the PDF version. Two days after its publication, on February 3, the daily issued an apology:

Al-Hayat Al-Jadida apologizes to readers for a cartoon published Sunday, February 1, 2015, and completely rejects any suspicion or interpretation that the illustration is a depiction of the Prophets and Messengers. In its respect for the sanctity of the exalted divine religions and its professionalism, the newspaper has established a board of inquiry to investigate the published cartoon, whose interpretation is in doubt. This is in addition to [the newspaper's] announcement that its intent in publishing [the cartoon] was to defend religions and the message of love and peace.

It should be mentioned that the cartoon appears neither on Sabaaneh's social media accounts nor on websites that publish cartoons from Arab publications. Since February 1, Saba'aneh's personal website has been offline.

The rest can be read on your own, and those who do read further will see that radical groups are already calling for Sabaaneh's execution!

But Sabaaneh is dealing with a religion expressing a "message of love and peace," so nothing barbaric will happen to him. After all, the cartoon's "interpretation is in doubt." It might not really be an image of Mohammad at all!

Imagine that! But not too clearly . . .

Quino's Fall from Eden

Eden

by

Quino

Yesterday, Dario Rivarossa posted the link to this political cartoon by Joaquín Salvador Lavado, better known as Quino, and provided the following details:

The Original Sin seen by the great Argentine comic artist Quino. From a mid-1980s book I just happened to reread.

But Dario neglected to specify the book, so I cannot provide proper and fitting attribution. I must therefore plagiarize . . . until such time as Dario posts a redeeming comment to get me off the hook. No, I'm not identifying myself with that serpent on the pole (which I assume is no visual pun on John 3:14 and Numbers 21:4-9; cf. Genesis 3:1-24) Anyway, would that Dario could likewise unhook Adam and Eve, who have gotten themselves into a tight spot, one with significant sociopolitical repercussions, I'd wager, "for the wages of sin is death"! Or so says Paul in Romans 6:23. By the way, I've never liked this verb "is" in this verse from the King James Version of the Bible, for it seems to 'sin' against grammar. Did the KJV translation committee think that "wages" is singular? Or that such wages do not apply to their grammatical sin? Or were they simply insincere? Quite a singular reading of a plural ending, in any case!

Anyway, the Adam and Eve story gets returned to again and again, subjected to hermeneutic reinterpretations, both before and after Paul, even by me here, if one is interested in finding out . . .

The Virtue of Helpfulness

Cartoon by Ken Pyne

Ken Pyne - Cartoons For Sale

I was granted the opportunity to be helpful yesterday when Heddy, the instructor in an afternoon class prior to mine, had apparently forgotten her coffee cup and what I assumed to be her USB clip. I had five minutes to spare before class, so I went looking for her, but another teacher, Carolyn, turned out to be substituting for Heddy, so I ended up on a wild goose chase that eventually led back to the classroom, where I found the substitute teacher -- Carolyn, of course, whom I'd earlier encountered in the hallway before realizing that she was substituting, and who now understood why we'd passed each other a couple of minutes before. She greeted me with a smile of thanks for the effort I'd made, took her cup, and accepted the USB, informing me that a student had probably left it and that she'd see that the girl get it back. I later received a thoughtful thanks from Carolyn:

Dear Jeffery,

Thank you for picking up my tumbler, and my student's usb today.

I'm teaching Heddy's class while she's gone and had to hurry to my next class.

I appreciate it,

Caroline

I responded in my typically thoughtful manner:

Dear Caroline,

No problem. I'm always glad for the opportunity to seem nicer than I am.

Yours,

Jeffery

And I meant that sincerely, for I secretly begrudge my every act of helpfulness and only care about appearances and thus merely hypocritically perform good deeds, and I'm only letting everyone in on the truth about my actual character in an effort to appear deeply helpful to readers who want to know me better. In that spirit, let me urge readers to click over to Ken Pyne's amusing cartoon page for more of his humor and perhaps some of his purchasable cards.

No thanks necessary. Glad to be of assistance.

"Nigerian Jihad" Revisited

Shariah in Nigeria

Twelve States with Sharia Implemented since 1999

(Image from Wikipedia)

Way back on February 22, 2006, I posted a blog entry titled "Nigerian Jihad" in which I called attention to Nigeria, where Islamist attacks on Christians had occurred in 'retaliation' for the Muhammad Cartoons that had recently been published in Denmark. I summed up my post as follows:

This is not happening just in Nigeria, nor only in Nigeria and Indonesia, but throughout the Muslim world because of Saudi attempts to spread Wahabi Islam through education offered to non-Saudis, through indoctrination of Muslim pilgrims, and through the funding of mosques outside of Saudi Arabia. The Wahabi form of Islam quickly presses for sharia and engages in jihad against non-Muslims (or even 'impure' Muslims), with varying degrees of success.

I'd probably express that in a more nuanced manner these days, for I've learned more about various forms of Islamism, but I largely stand by what I wrote. Anyway, this blog entry, "Nigerian Jihad," got no attention until yesterday morning, which was the 22nd of February 2011 back across the International Date Line, exactly five years since the entry was posted (i.e., 22nd of February 2006). That apparently wasn't coincidence, either, for yesterday's blogger hailed from a website address that included the expression "nigerianjihad," which suggests that he was perhaps engaged in some vanity Googling, but he didn't like what he found, for he left this comment to express his ill-considered opinion:

These words steaming with their suffocating odour trickling from the prejudiced mind are words of Devil-incanate. It is unimaginable to think that a pilgrime in his short rigourous days of worship in Saudi Arabia could have time to sit and be programmed with any idea other than something related to pilgrimage ritual for which he travel to the place. Mind what you say.

A pilgrime?! Sir, clean up your own language! And tidy up your spelling of 'incanate'! I'll then deal with the odorous steam 'trickling' from my mind. Anyway, the good man's pseudonym was "Mujahid An Najeriy," which I suppose means something like "Nigerian Holy Warrior," so I can imagine the company in which "he travel" (if I might borrow his odd subjunctive). I responded to Mr. Mujahid in my usual respectful manner, first quoting his imperative to show that I'm paying attention:

"Mind what you say."

That's hard to do when I'm a "Devil-incarnate." But I'm pleased to see that your own words are so utterly under your control.

I then followed up his link to what turned out to be his own blog, titled Nigerian Mujahideen Forum. His motto reads: "A good Muslim is never a slave but struggler in the way of Allah." A bit lengthy for a catchy motto, though I'd extend its length by an indefinite article, but to each his own. From looking over Mr. Mujahid's 'forum', I see that he's also a straggler in the way, for he's posted only ten entries since his initial entry of March 26, 2010 and managed to garner merely a single comment in all that time: his own. Life must truly be a struggle for Mr. Mujahid in such a lonely forum.

But if he's not blogging very often, what exactly would a Nigerian Islamist whose pseudonym means "Nigerian Holy Warrior" be doing in all that spare time of his? Recall that wise old adage: "The Devil makes work for idle hands."

As "Devil-incarnate," I should try to keep him busy . . .

Tetragrammaton in Popeye the Sailor Man?

Tetragrammaton?

In Popeye?

(Image from The Big Cartoon Database)

With all my recent attention focused on the Gospel of John and the Tetragrammaton, I almost neglected to note the Name of the Lord implicit in the title and text of the second Popeye cartoon, released in 1933, though it was apparently the first official one according to The Big Cartoon Database entry on this animated feature:

The first official Popeye cartoon. This short also has Bluto singing the opening title song. This cartoon also featured the debut appearance of J. Wellington Wimpy, as well as the first usage of the opening/closing ship doors in the main titles. (The Big Cartoon Database)

You Tube seems to have the entire animated cartoon for our viewing pleasure, though tastes in humor have changed, as have views of Native Americans, thank goodness.

An interesting side note is that Ralph Ellison's protagonist in Invisible Man, published in 1952, quotes Popeye's self-identifying line. According to Anne Seidlitz, writing "Ralph Ellison: An American Journey" (PBS, August 24th, 2005):

When the protagonist in INVISIBLE MAN comes upon a yam seller (named Petie Wheatstraw, after the black folklore figure) on the streets of Harlem and remembers his childhood in a flood of emotion, his proclamation "I yam what I yam!" is Ellison's expression of embracing one's culture as the way to freedom.

Was Ellison alluding not only to Popeye but also to Exodus 2:14 in his protagonist's own madeleine episode? Exodus was, after all, a favorite book for African Americans, given its story of freedom from slavery.

Well, one can't always be serious about issues of religion, hence today's blog entry on Popeye's self-identification, but as to whether the Popeye figure himself obscurely alludes to Exodus 2:14, only Max and Dave Fleischer know for sure . . .

"Where's Muhammad?"

Where's Muhammad?

I've borrowed this "Black and White" image from my son's art blog because the Muslim prophet Muhammad is conspicuous in it by his utter absence from it. One might opine that there remains a Muhammad-shaped hole in every non-depiction of Muhammad's image.

Is non-depiction therefore also now forbidden?

The Washington Post thinks so, as Andrew Alexander has noted in his Ombudsman column for Sunday, October 10, 2010, "Where was the 'Where's Muhammad?' cartoon?" In that column, Alexander drew attention to a recent cartoon titled "Where's Muhammad?" by Non Sequitor artist Wiley Miller:

Miller is known for social satire. But at first glance, the single-panel cartoon he drew for last Sunday seems benign. It is a bucolic scene imitating the best-selling children's book "Where's Waldo?" A grassy park is jammed with activity. Animals frolic. Children buy ice cream. Adults stroll and sunbathe. A caption reads: "Where's Muhammad?"

Alexander notes the cleverness in Miller's cartoon:

What is clever about last Sunday's "Where's Muhammad?" comic is that the prophet does not appear in it.

Nor did the cartoon itself appear in the hard copy of the Washington Post for October 3, 2010, though that cartoon did inadvertently make the online version. What was the reasoning behind this laughably slipshod censorship? Alexander again explains:

Style editor Ned Martel said he decided to yank it, after conferring with others, including Executive Editor Marcus W. Brauchli, because "it seemed a deliberate provocation without a clear message." He added that "the point of the joke was not immediately clear" and that readers might think that Muhammad was somewhere in the drawing.

Well, Muhammad might also be obscurely present in my son's drawing above, too, but I dare anyone to find him, and double-dare anyone to take offense, though some fanatics, undoubtedly, will take my double-dare. Perhaps even earnestly rather than deceitfully. Would anyone question this, given our experiences of the past few years? Oh, I suppose that some readers might still be unaware of the controversies over images of Muhammad. Alexander also recognizes this possibility and therefore goes to the trouble of explaining the point:

Miller's cartoon is clearly a satirical reference to the global furor that ensued in 2006 after a Danish newspaper invited cartoonists to draw the prophet Muhammad as they see him. After the cartoons were published, Muslims in many countries demonstrated against what they viewed as the lampooning of Islam's holiest figure.

Miller's Sunday drawing also keyed on "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day!," a free-speech protest this year by cartoonists responding to what was widely interpreted as a death threat from an Islamic cleric against two animators who depicted Muhammad wearing a bear suit in an episode of the "South Park" television show. If enough cartoonists drew Muhammad, protest organizers reasoned, it would be impractical to threaten all of them.

I agreed with the cartoonists who protested death threats against South Park's non-depiction of Muhammad, which is why I also at that time posted an image that was not Muhammad. Indeed, I stoutly hold that we must all stand up for our right not to draw Muhammad, else even that right will be taken from us!

With that in mind, I hereby declare Sunday, October 17, 2010, as "Everybody Not Draw Muhammad Day," and I expect an enormous number of participants since even Muslims will join in.

Martin Kramer on Yale's 'Iconoclasm'

Muhammad Cartoons

Censored by Yale

(Image from Wikipedia)

Presumably, most readers recall the controversy that erupted when the Jyllands-Posten newspaper in Denmark printed the so-called Muhammad cartoons. Radical Islamist whipped up a frenzy in the Muslim world with violent protests over depictions of their prophet that supposedly portrayed him as violent when everybody knows that Muhammad was simply a peaceful religious founder and Islam obviously a religion of peace.

Now, the scholar Jytte Klausen has written an analysis of this controversy titled The Cartoons That Shook the World, and Yale University Press is publishing it . . . but without the earthshaking cartoons! Klausen wanted the cartoons included, but Yale said (and I paraquote), 'No way! The Muslim world is far too volatile!' This despite Klausen's findings, as summarized by Yale University Press:

She concludes that the Muslim reaction to the cartoons was not -- as was commonly assumed -- a spontaneous emotional reaction arising out of the clash of Western and Islamic civilizations. Rather it was orchestrated, first by those with vested interests in elections in Denmark and Egypt, and later by Islamic extremists seeking to destabilize governments in Pakistan, Lebanon, Libya, and Nigeria.

Not so volatile, after all? I guess that Yale didn't believe Klausen's analysis. Actually, I find myself only in partial agreement, based on this summary. I think that the newspapers made quite clear at the time that the Muslim reaction was orchestrated by radical Islamist, and I'd also add that Klausen's opinion to the contrary, I consider this also to have in fact been in fact a civilizational clash, for the Islamists would not have been able to instigate violent protest all over the Muslim world against the West if a tense division weren't already present.

Be that as it may, over at Sandbox, Martin Kramer has an interesting perspective on this issue of Yale's 'iconoclasm':

I don't know if publishing these images in an academic book at this time would run a "serious risk of instigating violence." Everything I do know tells me that it wouldn't. Extremists are always looking for something to exploit, but it has to be a new, unprecedented (perceived) offense against Islam. Dante's Inferno, Rushdie's The Satanic Verses, the Danish cartoons -- these are all old perceived offenses, too familiar to fire up a sense of indignation. No doubt there will be another round at some point -- and no doubt, its ostensible "cause" will surprise us all. (That's because it won't really be the cause, but a pretext -- like the Danish cartoons.)

I think that he's right about this point. Including the Muhammad images in this book by Klausen would have raised little or no controversy for precisely the reasons Kramer notes. "But," as Kramer also notes, "that's neither here nor there":

The reason we have "restricted visas, travel bans and demeaning airport luggage searches" (and other disdained measures) is so that in America, a university press can publish the Danish cartoons in a book about the Danish cartoons, and do so without fear. If we didn't have that line of defense, we would constantly have to censor ourselves and ban whole classes of free expression, lest we be tormented by fanatic extremists.

In other words, America is supposed to stand for free speech -- and protected free speech, at that! Yale has blinked when there was likely no glaring threat to blink at and assuredly many reasons not to blink if there even were such a threat.

Land of the free and home of the brave? Only if we keep it that way.

The Mystery of Stefan Mart

Stefan Mart, Tales of the Nations

(Image from Stefan Mart Homepage)

Yesterday, I discovered a mystery, and if you liked the wonderful image of Don Quixote that appeared in my blog, then you may also have gone on to discover the same mystery.

That image of Don Quixote was borrowed from the Stefan Mart Homepage, which was set up in 2004 and from which the above image is also taken, but the book itself appeared in Germany in 1933. It was loved by millions of children but, apparently, suppressed by the Nazis as Hitler's political star rose because the book "seemed to respect other cultures." After the war, the book again rose in popularity among children.

Oddly, nobody seems to know who Stefan Mart was, and the name itself seems to have been a pseudonym.

This is a mystery, for the artist -- whoever he was -- exhibits great technical skill, fine attention to detail, expressive use of color, lively ability with perspective, and unforgettable mastery of caricature. Rainer Würgau, who maintains the website, says it better:

So who was Stefan Mart? For the moment all we can say is that he is the master who created Tales of the Nations. We do not know whether he wrote and illustrated other books under this name, or created other works, nor can we exclude the possibility that the tales and pictures are the work of two people. But we do know that the illustrator of the tales was an outstanding graphic artist and painter who struck out on a path all of his own making. He obviously had first-rate training, but he made such original use of everything which can be learnt during a course of studies in art that one has the impression he learnt his craft effortlessly. The caricature is the centre of his talent: the representation of facial expressions and gestures. He is an actor with brush and crayon. His style is versatile: he is a parodist; he is familiar with the world of European painting and with the various genres -- landscape painting, still lifes, anatomical painting, costumes, architecture, seascapes and above all animal studies. He is aware of the value of his knowledge and skills: he neither allows himself to be carried away by modernism, nor does he remain fettered by tradition. He achieves the remarkable feat of directing these two very divergent forces as it were into one river bed. The garish, loud, abstract and crazy elements of modern art have their place in this pictorial language; at the same time it remains true to the principles of naturalism: represents and imitates expressions and gestures of man and beast with profound empathy. The result transcends the limits of the book as medium and that of the static image. The artist is fully aware of this and is striving towards new horizons: towards the motion picture, the cinema, in particular the animated cartoon: Stefan Mart is a pioneer of the modern cartoon.

A pioneer, but also truly great at what he did, yet he is almost totally forgotten. I urge readers to go to the website and take a look. Here's another sample, from an 'American' story titled "Bobby Box" that Stefan Mart himself seems to have created.


Although Stefan Mart sometimes allows his caricature to slip into stereotypes in depicting people of the 'nations', I don't have the impression that the artist intended anything demeaning. He simply seems to be having great fun.

You will, too.

Danish Embassy Bombing: Merely To Jolt Our Memory

Helpful Reminder Not To Look!

(Ignored Image by Kurt Westergaard)

Lest we might forget, militant Islamists exploded a car bomb outside the Danish Embassy in Islamabad, Pakistan on Monday to remind us that we should not be looking at Westergaard's satirical cartoon above, nor at any of the other satirical, political cartoons published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten on September 30, 2005.

All of these satirical images have been securely collected at the Wikipedia entry on the Jyllands-Posten affair and can be safely avoided at that site.

They should therefore not be looked at via this link.