I just read a very upsetting article in the Wall Street Journal. Random House has spiked publication of a novel, The Jewel of Medina, by a debut novelist named Sherry Jones, out of fear that it would become the next Satanic Verses. The novel is about a child bride of the Prophet Muhammad, and the fear was that it would cause an outbreak of extremist Muslim violence, apparently because of its depiction of Muhammad's sexuality.
Obviously I haven't read the novel in question (always a problem when discussing censored books). But it was clearly not a work akin to the Danish cartoons which were the last version of this particular global culture war. Whatever you thought of them, those cartoons were obviously meant to be provocative, if not offensive, as is satire's wont. Based on the article and its description of the book, Jones, who learned Arabic to write her novel, had no such intention to offend.
Full disclosure: Random House is my publisher, too. Based on the scant public information, its difficult to have an informed opinion as to whether their fears justified spiking the novel (unless you're of the view that such fears could never justify withdrawing a book, an easy position to take if you don't have to go into their office every day). There can be no doubt that it is appropriate to take seriously any concern that publishing a cultural work that is "offensive to Muslims" may endanger the safety of a publisher's employees -- the death toll from such speech is real. But it is a sad day when a major American publisher decides not to publish a novel because of fears that it might incite religious zealots to violence.
What is most upsetting about the present debacle is the central role played by an American academic, Denise Spellberg, in causing the book to be withdrawn. At Jones' suggestion, Random House sent the book to Spellberg for a blurb. Spellberg didn't just dislike the book; she decided to actively campaign against its being published, first by asking someone who ran a Muslim-oriented web site to "warn Muslims" about it. She followed that up by contacting Random House, which was coincidentally also publishing a forthcoming book by Spellberg, and warning her editor that the novel would potentially cause an outbreak of violence against the publishing house.
Incredibly, not satisfied with those efforts at censorship, Spellberg then had an attorney write a letter to Random House, threatening to sue them if they associated her with Jones' novel. To me, this is the part of the story where Spellberg goes from being an aspiring censor (bad enough), to a malignant lunatic. I know a thing or two about both book publishing and the law, and there is simply no way a rational human being would do this. How on earth was Random House going to use Spellberg's name in association with the novel? I imagine it was pretty clear at that point that she wasn't going to blurb it! And if Random House used her name in association with it by saying something like: "Denise Spellberg hated this novel so much she tried to keep us from publishing it," -- not exactly a brilliant marketing strategy -- she certainly couldn't sue them for that.
Its clear that if anyone should have been silenced out of this mess, its Spellberg, who comes across as a self-deluded raving fascist. Regardless of the merits of The Jewel of Medina -- which we may never be able to judge -- it is a sad day for free speech in this country when a book is censored out of fear that its content will cause offense. It's an even sadder day when the instigator of that censorship is herself an academic and author. For shame, Denise Spellberg. May your own books be freely published, and never, ever, read.
Comments