Denise Spellberg Responds: "I've A Ph.D. In Cluelessness From Columbia And You Don't"

Denise Spellberg is the academic who told the editor of a Muslim website that a soon to be released novel, The Jewel of Medina, "made fun of muslims and their history," causing him to post that on a message board, which eventually led to threats of violence resulting in Random House abandoning the book and author at the last minute.

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.

And if you think my "clueless" accusation is unfounded, simply read her statements from two WSJ articles.

From today: I Didn't Kill 'The Jewel of Medina'

As a historian invited to "comment" on the book by its Random House editor at the author's express request, I objected strenuously to the claim that "The Jewel of Medina" was "extensively researched," as stated on the book jacket. As an expert on Aisha's life, I felt it was my professional responsibility to counter this novel's fallacious representation of a very real woman's life. The author and the press brought me into a process, and I used my scholarly expertise to assess the novel. It was in that same professional capacity that I felt it my duty to warn the press of the novel's potential to provoke anger among some Muslims.

Okay, Aisha is off-limits. But then there's this from the previous WSJ piece:

"I walked through a metal detector to see 'Last Temptation of Christ,'" the controversial 1980s film adaptation of a novel that depicted a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. "I don't have a problem with historical fiction. I do have a problem with the deliberate misinterpretation of history. You can't play with a sacred history and turn it into soft core pornography."

Yet, Spellberg acknowledges in her response today that The Jewel of Medina was, in fact, a novel.

The novel provides no new reading of Aisha's life, but actually expands upon provocative themes regarding Muhammad's wives first found in an earlier novel by Salman Rushdie, "The Satanic Verses," which I teach.

Putting aside that Spellberg, a Ph.D., doesn't even seem to grasp the actual meaning of the word novel, what scholarship is it that qualifies someone to declare Aisha and subsequently Mohammad are "very real" individuals one should take great care to not misrepresent in a novel, but somehow it's fine to have Jesus hook up with Mary, as that's suddenly simply historical fiction?

That makes absolutely no sense, unless one is somehow injecting a religious interpretation of these four personalities. Or is it her unique scholarship that has somehow discovered Jesus is a mythical figure and Mohammad is a true and actual prophet? If so, she should share it with the world, as I suspect minds much sharper than hers have been debating such questions for centuries.

And if she doesn't abide censorship, as she claims - how can she possibly defend her actions below, as well as her decision to inform the muslim community pre-publication? Was she not under some form of confidentiality agreement? She is under contract with them to write ... wait for it ... "Thomas Jefferson's Koran."

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."

Meanwhile back in New York City, Jane Garrett, an editor at Random House's Knopf imprint, dispatched an email on May 1 to Knopf executives, telling them she got a phone call the evening before from Ms. Spellberg (who happens to be under contract with Knopf to write "Thomas Jefferson's Qur'an.")

"She thinks there is a very real possibility of major danger for the building and staff and widespread violence," Ms. Garrett wrote. "Denise says it is 'a declaration of war . . . explosive stuff . . . a national security issue.' Thinks it will be far more controversial than the satanic verses and the Danish cartoons. Does not know if the author and Ballantine folks are clueless or calculating, but thinks the book should be withdrawn ASAP."

And now, she has the nerve to deny responsibility for all this? I take it back. She's not clueless. The woman is a damned imbecile. In fact, Columbia should recall her and grant her an honorary doctorate in it.

(the previous article) ... falsely asserts that I am the "instigator" of the Random House Press decision not to publish a novel about the Prophet's wife titled, "The Jewel of Medina." I never had this power, nor did I single-handedly stop the book's publication.

Comments

[Spartan112]

I know the difference might be slight but in "The Last Temptation of Christ" the relationship between Christ and Mary M. doesn't actually happen. The events of the film happen only in Christ's mind as he is on the cross, he's thinking of what his life might have been like had he chosen a different path.

[Dan Riehl]

What's the diff? They are works of fiction, both of them. I didn't protest Last Temptation. Obviously, as with all historical "novels," the research she did was setting, customs, etc - plenty of historical novels are "well researched" That this idiot Spellberg used that to hang the work is BS. You can tell from her actions she's just shilling for Allah with this crap of hers. As I believe she's at a public university - she should be dismissed for her lack of ethics and integrity. Not to mention being too G-ddamned stupid to breathe and walk at the same time.

[Spartan112]

I don't agree with her, but I'm not sure anything she did displays a lack of ethics. The publishers probably should have thought twice before sending her the galleys.

[templar knight]

Dan, I can just imagine the outrage of the liberals had a conservative killed a book hostile in its interpretations to Jesus Christ, for instance. Oh, the censorship! And all the indignity the Spartan112 can gather is that he didn't agree with her. Just about par for the course.

[Spartan112]

Spare me the righteous indignation Temp. If it HAD been a book about Christ that was abandoned you wouldn't have made any comment other than to support the publishers decision.

[Fred Beloit]

Temp's right. "Censorship! What about civil rights!Blah blah blah."

The simple fact is the elites of the media/schmogressive world are scared s---less of the Muzzies. How sickening.

[Ralph]

She knew exactly what she was doing. If not then liberals are as cluless as they seem. Either way - not good. How on Earth could anybody not know Muslims would threaten violence against the author of a book critical of Islam? Has she been in a cave the last 25 years?

Spartan you seem to whish to 'get' Dan with your idiotic statement more than addressing the facts at hand. Are you able to address the facts at hand? Publisher axes book due to muslim fanatics threats of violence. That is the important fact here. Can you address that? Also can you point to a book being spiked because of threats of Christian violence?

[Spartan112]

I know of no book spiked for that reason, but I've known of a number of plays/gallery showings, etc. spike for that very reason. Certainly Right Wing hero Rudolph Giuliani has a long history of trying to pull exhibits based on pressure from the catholic church. Here's the thing, that actually is censorship. Random House made a business decision. Not one I agree with, but no one in the government tried to pressure them into spiking this book.

[Jack]

What little I read on line of the intro to "Jewel of Medina" looked like what I'd expect to see in a Harlequin Romance were I ever to look inside one of those bodice-rippers. Even the title fits the genre. Trashy garbage, from over-written twaddle to pornographic farces, have often been made base on historical facts and characters.

I am a Muslim and like many of my religion, a civil libertarian. Of course people should have the right to write, publish, buy, and read this sort of absurd twaddle, but I would hope that it would die in the market place from critical pans and neglect. From what I read I was more offended by the bad writing than by the content. Uh, yeah. It's a novel. However well or badly researched it is it's still fiction and shouldn't be taken too seriously. Oh, heavens... this crap shouldn't be taken seriously at all. What a tempest in a teapot all this is!

Any debate only inflates its "importance" (sic).

[Fred Beloit]

Spart writes: "Certainly Right Wing hero Rudolph Giuliani has a long history of trying to pull exhibits based on pressure from the catholic church."

BBeeeeeyyyyyyaaaaatttttttt. Wrong on two counts.
First, Giuliani only has a short history of trying to pull disgusting anti-Christian exhibits that relied on tax-payer money and on using public places maintained by tax-payer money. Separation of "church" (including atheist church) and state mean anything to you, Spart? Second, how do you know it was Catholic Church "pressure" and not his own judgement that caused him to make the decisions he did? Is it atheist pressure that makes you write the comments you do?

[templar knight]

Uh, Spartan, I was merely pointing out liberal hypocrisy. As usual, you wish to change the subject.

[Spartan112]

As much as I revere them Fred, an art museum is not a church. And as for the first count, what is a "long" history in the case of Guliani? He started censoring art in 1999, 9 years seems like plenty to me but it is open to interpretation. Oh, and I never suggested that the Catholic Church pressured Guliani.

[Fred Beloit]

Oh my Spart: " He started censoring art in 1999, 9 years seems like plenty to me but it is open to interpretation."

Spart, you peed your diapers when you were a baby, do you still do that? When was the last time you heard of Giuliani wanting to close an ant-Christian exhibit for which tax money was paying a part. How stupid.

[Spartan112]

How recent does it have to be? I mean he hasn't had a position of power that has allowed him to promote his form of censorship in a number of years. Given the chance I'm sure he's love to pull funding for some anti-catholic exhibits.

[Steve]

To Spartan112: They cancelled the book for fear of "danger to the building and staff" and "violence" and after consulting "security experts" (Nomani in WSJ http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121797979078815073.html) and you would still call that a "business decision?"

[tjproudamerican]

I am a Liberal and people like Denise Spellberg make me ashamed. Thank you for calling her out.