Fecke Health Update — with a greeting card!

Over on his home blog, Jeff has some good news:

Basically, everything is going as well as I could hope so far. Yes, surgery is painful and not fun, but I knew that going in, and it’s not debilitating. And I got Vicodin, just like Vikings quarterback Brett Favre used to be addicted to, so that’s cool. The surgery itself appears to have done exactly what it was supposed to with no complications, so that’s great.

The better news, however, is that the CT scan that they did on me last week appears to be clear. That doesn’t mean the cancer hasn’t spread, but there’s only about a 15% chance that it has, and that means I can likely avoid chemotherapy, at least at first.

So yay!

In other news, David Ellis Dickerson of “Greeting Card Emergency” fame — whose new book, House of Cards, was recently reviewed on “Alas” — provides this video:

(And here’s David’s post accompanying the video. Thanks, David!)

Posted in About the Bloggers | 2 Comments

What If Black Women Were White Women?

From the blog Alienated Conclusions, and via Shadow and Act, which in turn was via Womanist Musings:

What if suddenly, instantly, the power of white femininity were transferred to black women?

The answer is clear: Black women would represent value, purity; and based on their natural traits would be worthy of protection and instantly become the objects of universal desire. White women would represent the opposite.

“Beauty tar potion” would become globally popular to get the “black look.” “Dove” would be replaced with a black soap called “Raven” to help exfoliate the skin and bring out subtle hints of melanin.

White female features would be declared violent. Their “jagged” thin lips, “knife sharp” noses, and “harsh” jaw lines would be nature’s way of expressing why men have a natural preference for the soft features of black women. Soft lips, soft cheekbones, and soft, round noses would be proof of natural femininity. Full, pink lips and large, dark eyes would become associated with virginal black girls whose purity must not be compromised. Black female features would thus be said to represent youth.

Straight, blond hair would be considered “wild and unruly” because when the wind blew, it did not stay in place. Women with naturally straight hair would hide their “unruly” and “wild” stick-straight hair in public. The desire for “lightweight hair” that defied gravity would permanently end the use of blow dryers. Keeping one’s natural blond hair wild and straight would become indicative of a political statement.

The anti-aging properties of black female skin combined with soft, curvy bodies would be proof of the overall reproductive health of black women. Scientists would argue that black women were naturally preferred as long term mates and mothers because they were “healthier.”

There’s more at the original post.

Clicktrigger in the comments at Shadow And Act added some more (click over to read all her suggestions):

…there’d be a whole new kind of nose job.

…the default colors for underwear would be black, brown and tan. Dead-white bras would barely even exist. You’d have to order those off the internet or something. And black cotton panties would be a symbol of feminine innocence.

…the irreversible skin-darkening (and iris-browning) caused by the prescription drug Latisse would go from being a heavily downplayed, barely-mentioned negative side effect to being the primary selling point. It would be sold OTC, with little to no regulation or FDA input. Everyone would just shrug and say “why would anyone put that dangerous stuff on their skin/in their eyes?!” even as dark skin and brown eyes are aggressively promoted as the ideal. […]

…the meanings of certain words would change. “Fair” would simply mean “light-colored.” The “beautiful” meaning would fall out of use, and the archaic word “ebon” would come back to replace it. Poets would pine for their muses with “ah, she was so ebon, so ebon!” (We’d also go back to using the word “just” instead of “fair.” Kids would whine, “He got more than me! That’s unjust!”)

Posted in Race, racism and related issues | 23 Comments

Evangelical Christians Are Shocked–Shocked, I Tell You!–To Find Out Their Anti-Gay Rhetoric Might Encourage Uganda's Push To Make Homosexuality A Capital Offense

Jeffrey Gettleman, in this New York Times article, writes about how three Evangelical Christians from the United States–Scott Lively (click here to read quotes from his talk in Uganda), Caleb Lee Brundidge and Exodus International board member Don Schmierer–are now trying to distance themselves from an event in Uganda at which they spoke about “how to make gay people straight, how gay men often sodomized teenage boys and how ‘the gay movement is an evil institution’ whose goal is ‘to defeat the marriage-based society and replace it with a culture of sexual promiscuity.’ The reason for their backpedaling is that the event contributed to the climate that led to the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009, which would make homosexuality a capital crime. In a rhetorical move that is remarkably similar to the ways in which the religious right tries to distance itself from people who murder doctors that perform abortions, each of these men or their organizations has issued statements about how their message is one of love and compassion, not hatred and violence. Read the article and follow some of the links. Their hypocrisy speaks for itself.

I do have to share, though, my favorite quote from Gettleman’s article. Referring to the Ugandan Anti-Homosexuality Bill, Schmierer says, “That’s horrible, absolutely horrible. Some of the nicest people I have ever met are gay people.” (Makes me wonder if any of them are Black.)

Cross-posted on It’s All Connected.

Posted in Homophobic zaniness/more LGBTQ issues, Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans and Queer issues | 22 Comments

How Refusing Marriage Equality Leads To Diluting Marriage

From the LA Times:

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton won praise in June after pushing to extend many federal benefits traditionally provided to diplomats’ spouses to gay and lesbian partners.

Since then, unmarried heterosexual couples have been lining up to ask for benefits too. They have approached the State Department’s personnel office and the diplomats’ union, arguing that they are entitled to equal treatment. At least one couple has threatened to challenge the rules in court as discriminatory.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which is responsible for policy on federal workers, is weighing such an extension of benefits, U.S. officials say — to the consternation of conservatives.

This is predictable. If same sex couples cannot marry, then “marriage-light” policies have to be created for same-sex couples. But why should “marriage-light” policies exclude heterosexual couples?

Marriage laws, fundamentally, are how we turn someone unrelated to us, into our legally recognized closest relative in the world. I don’t think that purpose is undermined by opening marriage lite provisions to straight couples. ((Although I can see a disadvantage to having a multiplicity of marriage and marriage-lite laws; the more such laws there are, the less they will be universally understood, which makes them less useful.)) However, there’s no doubt that conservatives who oppose equality for gay people do see marriage lite laws as diluting marriage, which makes it ironic that their actions make the continued growth of marriage lite arrangements inevitable.

In somewhat related news, the DC group Full Equality Now! has walked back its initial opposition to anti-gay ads on public buses (which they now say was just a draft), after the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance and the ACLU stood up for the free speech rights of anti-gay groups. Good for GLAA and the ACLU, and good for FEN! for being willing to back off their mistake (even if they did it a little ungracefully).

Hat tips to Marriage Debate.

Posted in Families structures, divorce, etc, Free speech, censorship, copyright law, etc., Same-Sex Marriage | 59 Comments

Cool Needs No Excuse

If you’ve ever studied anything related to fractals, you’ve no doubt come across the Mandelbrot set. Named for its progenitor, mathematician Benoit Mandelbrot, the image takes a simple formula, repeats it, studies how quickly or slowly results approach or escape a boundary, and voilà ((Okay, it’s more complex than that, but I am not a mathematician, and am not able to adequately express it better.)) — a stunning image is born. And not just at the macro level — zooming in on small pieces of the set reveals striking details. And adding shading to indicate how quickly or slowly numbers escape zero, and you get beautiful images like this:

What’s amazing about that image is that it’s at a magnification of 1 x 1010. If we showed the rest of the Mandelbrot set to scale, it would need to be on a monitor with a diameter of four million kilometers. And yet there’s incredible detail there, all yielded from a simple equation.

The Mandelbrot set has become famous because it’s an elegant and beautiful example of chaos theory in action. Looking at fine detail in the Mandelbrot set gives us insight into, say, how a simple encoding of DNA can cause a tree to grow its branches, or a snail to grow its shell, or a human to grow its brain. Simple, repetitive steps yield results of staggering complexity.

The Mandelbrot set is beautiful and amazing, but it does have a minor flaw: it’s two-dimensional. That’s not a flaw from the standpoint of mathematics. But it does limit its scope — after all, we live in a three-dimensional world, and while we see in the Mandelbrot set tantalizing hints of biology and geology, it is not a representation of our world.

That thought has led Daniel White and Paul Nylander to work together on the “Mandelbulb,” a three-dimensional representation of a Mandelbrot-like set. It is not a literal three-dimensional Mandelbrot set, as that set is generated by an algorithm that has two variables. Essentially, it’s a two-dimensional equation. ((Please, mathematicians, don’t hurt me. I’m just a layman.))

White and Nylander instead worked to create a set like the Mandelbrot set, that would generate a three-dimensional object that showed the same kind of detail at high levels of zoom.

And while they’re still fine-tuning their algorithm, they’ve reached a point at which their project is bearing fruit.

Now, that’s interesting — but the question is what zooming in on the object yields.

The answer is this:

And this:

And this:

And of course, many, many more startling and beautiful and most amazingly, familiar images, images that could well have come from an alien planet or a close-up of coral or an underwater cave.

This universe is written in the language of mathematics. And in many cases, the greatest beauty comes from the simplest equations. For me, this is the thing that makes me feel most connected to, for lack of a better term, a higher power. If there is a God or something similar, It is so much more interesting than a God who simply wills things into being. It’s a creator with subtle, simple, dazzlingly brilliant skill. And if there is no God, if the universe is truly random — well, we have drawn through random chance a very interesting and remarkable universe indeed.

Either way, it’s explorations like this that remind me how very much we’ve learned — and how very much we have yet to learn. And how worth it the journey is.

Posted in Mind-blowing Miscellania and other Neat Stuff | 8 Comments

Shorter Naomi Seligman

Shorter Naomi Seligman: “Fashion magazines, designers, and talk show hosts are too supportive of fat people, and should do more to make fat people feel like crap.”

More goodness in her post: A funny fat pun in the post title. Because that hasn’t been done a zillion times before. I bet that if she wrote a post about comics, it would be called “pow! Zing! Comics!” or something like that.

And the idea that people who are fat-positive are making money off fat people. It’s true, in the sense that anyone who appears on TV or in a magazine, and is paid for it, is making money. But the money to be made telling fat people that they suck is exponentially larger.

Posted in Fat, fat and more fat | 3 Comments

Today is a palindrome

2010.01.02, or if you prefer, 01-02-2010. It’s one of only 331 palindronic dates in the YYYY-MM-DD (or MM-DD-YYYY) format. The next one will be on November 2, 2011; after that, there won’t be another until February 2, 2020. The next one to take place in January will take place a bit over a century from now.

Just mentioning.  Consider this an open thread.

Posted in Link farms, Mind-blowing Miscellania and other Neat Stuff | 12 Comments

"The Myths of Liberal Zionism," by Yitzhak Laor – I want to read this book

Writing in the January issue of Harper’s Magazine, Joshua Cohen wrote this at the end of his review of Laor’s book:

It often seems that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is just […] a textual problem. If so, then the muddle of meaning that must be analyzed lies in parsing not Palestinian from Israeli, but “Israeli” from “Jew.” Only once those epithets have been dissevered can some sort of dialogue begin, between two political entities and not between two (or three) religions or Peoples. Until then, “Israel” will continue to be vilified as a word that means something other than what it should, while all critics of Israel will be accused of anti-Semitism.

It is not clear to me from the review how much of this is Cohen, how much of this is Laor and how much of it is Cohen putting into his own words what he agrees with in Laor’s book, but any book that leads to this kind of thinking, to asking these kinds of questions, whether I ultimately agree with the book or not, is a book worth reading. Now, if there were only 36 hours or more in a day. Sigh.

Cross-posted on It’s All Connected.

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Jews and Judaism, literature, Palestine & Israel | 1 Comment

Translating Classical Persian Poetry: Why Retranslate Attar's "Ilahi-Nama?"

Farid Al-Din Attar is one of the most important writers in the Persian canon. Not only is he a major poet in his own right, but his work offers crucial insight into Sufi thought and experience, while prefiguring other important poets like Rumi, Saadi and Hafez. As well, once translations of classical Persian literature began to appear in English in the 18th and 19th centuries, Attar’s work—along with, among others, that of the three poets I just mentioned—played an important role both in helping the English-speaking world of the time understand Persian and Islamic culture and in bringing into English literature an influence felt by the likes of Matthew Arnold and Lord Byron, and that contemporary writers like Robert Bly continue to find important. It is both ironic and a shame, therefore, that only one of Attar’s major works, Manteq al-Tayr, exists in a contemporary translation for a general English-language readership, The Conference of the Birds, published in 1984 by Afkham Darbandi and Dick Davis. Readable, enjoyable and poetically powerful, The Conference of the Birds is the kind of translation we deserve of a literature that has influenced ours in such significant ways. Unfortunately, whatever its merits on scholarly grounds, the same cannot be said—at least not with the same enthusiasm—for John Andrew Boyle’s out-of-print translation of Ilahi-Nama, The Ilahi-Nama or Book of God, published by the University of Manchester Press in 1976.

In an essay called “Representations of Attar in the West and in the East,” Christopher Shackle criticizes Margaret Smith’s 1932 translation of Manteq al-Tayr for being written “in a prose whose archaisms, including biblical ‘thee’s and ‘thou’s, cover Attar’s studiously clear style with a patina of reverence….” (187). Boyle’s Ilahi-Nama suffers from the same weakness. Here, for example, is his rendering of the passage in “The Tale of Marjuma” where the woman berates her brother-in-law for trying to have his way with her:

She said to him: “Art thou not ashamed before God? Dost thou thus show respect to thy brother?
Is this thy religion and thy probity? Dost thou thus keep trust for thy brother?
Go, repent, return to God, and eschew this wicked thought.”

That man said to the woman: “It is no use; thou must satisfy me at once,
Otherwise I will cease to concern myself about thee, I will expose thee to shame, I will slight thee.
Straightaway now I shall cast thee to destruction, I shall cast thee into a fearful plight.” (32)

As well, Boyle too often relies on a literalness that ends up being unintentionally comic and/or almost impossible to comprehend. The first line of the final section of the “Exordium,” in which Attar praises and meditates upon the greatness of God—“Come, musk of the soul, open thy musk-bladder, for thou art the deputy of the Vicar of God” (27)—is an example of the former. In “The Tale of Marjuma,” to give an example of the latter, when the female protagonist is on a ship at sea, about to be raped by the entire crew, she prays to God to save her. This is Boyle’s rendering of that scene:

When the woman learned of these wicked men’s feelings, she saw the whole sea as a liver from her heart’s blood.
She opened her mouth [and said]: “O Knower of Secrets, preserve me from the evil of these wicked men.” (38)

The phrase “the whole sea as a liver from her heart’s blood” clearly relates to the idea in Persian culture that the liver, not the heart, is the seat of emotion, but what the phrase means, except in the vaguest of senses, is far from clear. By way of comparison, here is my version of those lines:

When she learned
what the men intended, she turned
and saw in the sea surrounding her,
filled with her heart’s blood, a liver
wide enough to hold all she felt.
Her mouth fell open. She knelt,
prayed: “Protect me, Knower of Secrets!
Save me from this wickedness.”

I make no claim that this is great poetry, or that there is no better solution to the “heart’s-blood-liver” metaphor; and I am very aware that whether or not my translation will endure is a question that only time and readers will answer, but the value of bringing Ilahi-Nama into 21st century American English poetry is not only, and not even primarily, that it might be successful in these terms. Rather, the value lies in the sustained engagement translation is—both in the writing and the reading—with another culture.

On the one hand, the value of such engagement is, or ought to be, self-evident, requiring no further justification. On the other hand, however, given the current national and international political moment, it is, or ought to be, impossible to talk about translating Persian literature without also talking about both the state of relations between Iran and the United States and the political unrest that has focused world attention on Iran since the contested presidential elections there in June 2009. Each of those dynamics demands that the people of the United States learn as much about the Iranian people, their culture and their history, as we possibly can, especially since our collective ignorance about Iran has been profound since diplomatic relations between our two countries ended after the Islamic Revolution in 1979-80. Boyle’s translation of Ilahi-Nama is not a text to which people are likely to go for that kind of learning, most immediately because it is out of print, but also because its archaic diction and biblical style is more likely than not to alienate them.

I am neither naïve nor arrogant enough to assume that my translation of Ilahi-Nama will by itself effect any change, large or small, in US-Iran relations or that it will alter even one reader’s notions about Iran and/or Islam. I do know, however, that each translated book made available to a reading public increases the likelihood of such change taking place. At the very least because it offers a radically different view of Islam from the version practiced and promulgated by the current Iranian government and can therefore help to combat the anti-Muslim stereotypes currently in fashion, but even more significantly because it is a great work of literature written by one of the world’s greatest poets, whom we in the United States deserve to know better than we do, a new literary translation of Ilahi-Nama should be among the books making such change possible.

Sources

ʻAṭṭār, Farīd al-Dīn. The Ilāhī-Nāma Or Book of God of Farīd Al-Dīn ʻAṭṭār. Trans. John Andrew Boyle. Persian Heritage Series, Vol. 29 Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1976.

Shackle, Christopher. “Representations of Attar in the West and in the East: Translations of the Mantiq Al-Tayr and the Tale of Shaykh Ṣanʻān.” Attar and the Persian Sufi Tradition: The Art of Spiritual Flight. Eds. Leonard Lewisohn, and Christopher Shackle. London: I. B. Tauris, 2006. 165-93.

Posted in Iran, literature | 3 Comments

Open Thread and short link farm: Fabric of Insincerity edition

This is an open thread. Post what you like; it’s all good, baby! Self-link love has been approved of by the motion picture association of America, and also my mom.

  1. David Link on a marriage broken up because the husband came out as gay: “The whole enterprise of gay rights has been to deconstruct this fabric of insincerity. No one is well served, gay or straight, by making us bear false witness against ourselves. In coming out, Gareth Thomas was doing no more than admitting what could no longer be denied; his regret was not for personal wrongdoing, but for the wrongdoing he felt the world demanded of him.”
  2. Seven real pro-family gifts from congress.
  3. I’ve long admired Tony Judt’s political writings. I didn’t know that he is disabled, with a progressive condition that has almost entirely paralyzed him below his neck. His short piece “Night,” about getting through the nights when he is immobile, is excellent. (I did wonder why he doesn’t have a voice-operated computer positioned so he can use it from his bed, but my guess is that he wants to encourage sleep, not put off going to sleep).
  4. Why women’s rights are a lousy argument for keeping US troops in Afghanistan. “To empower Afghan women, politically, would require either some kind of permanent NATO protectorate or else a deliberate effort to restructure Afghan politics in some much more fundamental way—either take power out of the hands of armed groups, or else to empower women to become militia leaders and warlords on their terms. We’re not seriously contemplating doing any of those things, for some pretty good reasons, but given those realities we shouldn’t kid ourselves too much about what we’re doing. The Taliban are horrible for women and the plan in Afghanistan is to entice them and their horrible views into a power-sharing agreement!”
  5. This really amused me — a series of photos someone left on his camera, to encourage anyone finding the camera to return it to him.
  6. A visual guide to the scientific consensus on global climate change.
  7. Alyssa is right: This is profane (and includes use of the “c” word) and to call the violence “gratuitous” is like calling the Ocean “moist.” And although the trailer says “mature audiences only,” that’s obviously not true: If I was really mature I wouldn’t have enjoyed this trailer enormously.

Posted in Link farms | 20 Comments