I haven’t done a Sunday Salon in a long time. I’m posting this in the wee hours of Sunday morning because I’ll be working from 11am to 10pm this Sunday.
This week, I reviewed one book:
Dead Until Dark by Charlaine Harris – Review
I also joined two new challenges. As always, all challenges and progress can be found on (duh) my challenge page. I joined the Sookie Stackhouse Reading Challenge and the World Citizen 2009 Challenge.
Since my last Sunday Salon, I reviewed several books: The Enchantress of Florence by Salman Rushdie, The Blood of Flowers by Anita Amirrezvani, How to Win a Cosmic War by Reza Aslan, The Old Man and the Sea by Ernest Heminway, & The Centurion’s Wife by Davis Bunn and Janette Oke.
I also wrote some blogs about non-reading related things, which is what I said I wanted to begin to do with my blog. I discussed the issue of Muslim women and marriage, and the Doha debate on it here. I also discussed my decision to wear hijab, and the issue of working and independence while wearing it, and I addressed the issue of banning the burkha.
Title: Dead Until Dark
Author: Charlaine Harris
Pages: 292
Genre: Fantasy, Mystery
Rating: 4.5/5
Sookie Stackhouse is a small-time cocktail waitress in small-town Louisiana. She’s quiet, keeps to herself, and doesn’t get out much. Not because she’s not pretty. She is. It’s just that, well, Sookie has this sort of “disability.” She can read minds. And that doesn’t make her too dateable. And then along comes Bill. He’s tall, dark, handsome – and Sookie can’t hear a word he’s thinking. He’s exactly the type of guy she’s been waiting for all her life…
But Bill has a disability of his own: he’s a vampire with a bad reputation. He hangs with a seriously creepy crowd, all suspected of – big surprise – murder. And when one of Sookie’s coworkers is killed, she fears she’s next…
I’m assuming most have heard of the hit HBO series True Blood, and I’m assuming most of you are also aware that True Blood is based off of the Sookie Stackhouse series, a.k.a. The Southern Vampire Mysteries series. I’m now officially a fan of both.
I’m really glad I watched the first season of True Blood before reading Dead Until Dark. It makes it much easier to hear the characters voices in my head, and picture them. I normally like being able to make this all up myself, but I don’t mind it this time around. Probably because I don’t want to imagine another pathetically tragic Edward. Because this is much, much better than Twilight.
I like that the book wasted no time and got straight to the point. It moves much faster than the TV series, but there’s more time spent getting to know the characters and other small, invented sub-plots on the TV series. One of the things I missed in Dead Until Dark was Tara, and Lafayette. Lafayette exists in Dead Until Dark, but doesn’t play much of a role.
Harris has a unique writing style when it comes to the internal dialogue of Sookie. I didn’t feel like it was the typical internal thoughts found in most fictional books – it was much, much more realistic and personal.
One thing I feared was that it would turn into something a little too Anita Blake. Which is to say, sex, sex, and more sex. There’s sex, but not too much of it, and the story remains realistic and balanced.
I would recommend Dead Until Dark (and most likely the entire series) to anyone who already watches True Blood, or anyone who’s a fan of vampire fiction.
Saira Khan is a British Muslim woman who, in the wake of Sarkozy’s controversial move to try to ban the burkha*, wrote an article, explaining the reasons why she supports it’s ban in Britain. You can read the full article here.
She starts off by telling a little anecdote about how she was amused by the irony of women wearing the burkha, shopping the latest fashions in Harrods. Right away, I was offended. Does she think Muslim women who cover don’t deserve nice things simply because they won’t wear them for everyone to see on the street? Does she think women who wear the burkha are uncultured, with no fashion sense? She is contributing to the idea that women who wear the burkha have no personality and no sense of self – the same idea which she is so strongly opposed to throughout the rest of the article.
Later, she makes a statement that she has no problem with grown women who wish to wear hijab. However, she later contradicts herself by equating hijab with forced marriages, abuse, and women who aren’t allowed to go to university.
However, despite how ridiculous the overall article is, I found myself agree with several things.
Khan brings up the health aspect of wearing the burkha. Women who wear it don’t get enough Vitamin D, and as a result, they develop health problems. I definitely agree that this is a problem. However, banning the burkha doesn’t solve this. Educating women on the health risks associated with fully covering, and making sure they’re aware of it and take Vitamin D supplement does solve this problem.
Fundamentalists are blamed by Khan for the rise of the burkha. I agree with this. I also agree that some fundamentalists think that it makes you a bad or improper Muslim woman if you don’t wear it. Fundamentalists who refuse to tolerate the legitimate differences of opinion regarding it’s use.
I agree that even among women who claim that they wear it out of their own free choice, many of them probably do not. Besides women who are directly forced to wear it, many women are pressured by their community, family, or friends to wear it. It’s not as if they wake up one day, and out of the blue they decide to wear it. I’m sure any Muslim woman can tell you that there is at least some pressure from community, family, or friends, to simply wear hijab. Doesn’t it make sense to think that similar pressure exists for some women to wear the burkha?
Khan claims that the burkha is dangerous to society. I agree. However, her reasoning is mostly that it doesn’t allow full integration with British society. I completely disagree with this. If the government bans the burkha, the women who wear it won’t be okay with it. They won’t wake up the next morning, put on a t-shirt and jeans, and go about running their errands. They will most likely stay inside, further marginalized and restricted. The ban would be more restricting and damaging to women than it is to allow them to wear the burkha.
But I do believe it’s dangerous to society in many cases. I believe that it takes all responsibility away from men, and places double the burden of responsibility on women. I think it makes it much too easy to dismiss women, stereotype them, and marginalize them. I think it contributes to misogynistic ideas and treatment.
However, no matter how much I may disagree fundamentally with the wearing of a burkha, I disagree even more with the idea that the government can tell citizens what they can and cannot wear. This isn’t an episode of What Not to Wear, or 1984. This is England, France, etc. – countries and governments which pride themselves on freedom. By Sarkozy or Saira Khan telling people they cannot wear the burkha, they are no better than a man who tells his wife she must wear it.
* “Burkha” in this article refers to this which is also called a niqab, not the typical blue burkha you’re probably used to seeing in Afghanistan.
Most of you probably don’t know this, but this past week I began wearing hijab. I feel like I should have membership to some exclusive club by now because before, I could blend in and no one knew I was Muslim. Now they know and I can’t hide it anymore. The reactions are hilariously pathetic and awesome. I want to share a few with you.
Woman: I really hate shopping at this one store because there’s lots of foreign workers there and you never know if they’ll speak English. I mean, I’m so glad you do. I mean. God. Oh, God. I just mean that, um…oh God *hyperventilating at this point*
Me: It’s okay, really…
I get the smile and the soft spoken “hi” that we retail workers use when we think our customer doesn’t speak English. The shock on their face when I ask something like, “Credit, please” or “Do I hit cancel for credit?” without an accent is priceless.
I also love how people talk really LOUDLY because they think I don’t speak ENGLISH. Because we all know if you don’t understand a language, hearing it LOUDER increases your chances of understanding it.
People act like I have cooties or something. They walk as far away from me as humanly possible. One woman even saw me in an aisle at the store, stopped, and ran away. It’s like they think if I sneeze they might catch the Islam if they get too close to me.
Rednecks: basically, my rule of thumb is that if I can smell your body odor from across the room, your opinion on anything doesn’t matter.
But this post isn’t all fun and games and laughing at stupid people. I’ve been thinking about how difficult it is to find work while wearing it or even keeping a job while wearing it. I work in retail, and while I can remain fashionable and wear my store’s clothes even while wearing hijab, my sales would be nowhere where they used to be. People are unfriendly, and unwilling to listen to my sales pitch like they were before. Which makes me think about how lucky the girls who wear it are who have a family to support them. Many girls I know who wear hijab have daddy’s money to pay their bills, and then their husband’s money. Working for them is more like fun money than it is a necessity.
I guess I’m talking about the AAPs – Arab American Princesses. But this isn’t just limited to Arabs. The girls who are 20 and in college but haven’t ever held even a part time job. The girls who will never have to worry about paying their tuition or cell phone bills, or even buying food or paying for health insurance.
In a way, I envy them and even hate them a little bit. Until I realize that this is a method of control, whether it’s intentional or not. I hear a lot of these girls complain that they can’t be independent working women. Part of me wants to tell them to shut up – take the money and count your blessings, while another part of me feels bad for them. Which is worse – the constant stress of finding or keeping a job and paying your bills, or being controlled and unable to be independent if you so choose?
I stress about financial issues pretty much all the time and often find myself wishing I had the safety net to fall back on that many affluent Muslim girls have. But then I realize that if I had to live even a month in their shoes, I’d probably be just as miserable. I fully enjoy being able to do whatever I want without really having to answer to anyone. I just hope these girls also realize that a month in my shoes and they’d probably be begging to go back to how things used to be as well. I wish it were easier to find a balance.
This week’s Booking Through Thursday challenge asks readers who sort their books in a meaningful and unique way. The original inspiration was this project, which is really cool. I wish I had enough books to come up with some of the things on that page, but here’s my attempt at it.
I tried to make sentences or something out of mine, but I don’t have the right books for it. The first picture is books with places in the name, or a title that refers to a place. The second picture is about earthy things – flowers, earth, leaves. On second though, I wish I had arranged the titles better.
Where have I been? I’ve been having a lot of fun, actually.
I’ve caught the creativity bug this summer. I’ve tried my hand at some painting as well as practicing with mehndi/henna.
I’ve also gotten into photography. I’m the very definition of amateur, with a very old digital camera. But even if my pictures don’t look the best I have a million ideas and it’s a lot of fun. My mother told me the other day that my photos remind me of her father’s photos, which is a huge compliment because he was well known in this state for his photography back in the day.
I’ve been job hunting, too. I’m still working part time, but looking for another part time job or full time. I’ve had an interview every day this week, so far.
I’m obsessed with True Blood, as well, so it seems logical that I start reading the books it’s based off of, right? Right. So far so good.
I’m not always around here, but you can always find me on Twitter, Flickr, and even Livejournal, which is updated daily.
Title: The Enchantress of Florence
Author: Salman Rushdie
Pages: 368
Genre: Historical Fiction
Rating: 4/5
The Enchantress of Florence is the story of a mysterious woman, a great beauty believed to possess the powers of enchantment and sorcery, attempting to command her own destiny in a man’s world. It is the story of two cities at the height of their powers – the hedonistic Mughal capital, in which the brilliant emperor Akbar the Great wrestles daily with question of belief, desire, and the treachery of his sons, and the equally sensual city of Florence during the High Renaissance, where Niccolo Machiavelli takes a starring role as he learns, the hard way, about the true brutality of power. Profoundly moving and completely absorbing, The Enchantress of Florence is a dazzling book full of wonders by one of the world’s most important living writers.
Several years ago I attempted to read The Satanic Verses. Twice. I couldn’t get more than a few chapters in. After that, I wrote Salman Rushdie off as a bad writer, and one I could never enjoy. I know – it was an unfair judgment to make based on one book. When I then saw The Enchantress of Florence on several of last years ‘best of 2008’ lists and decided to give Rushdie one more try.
It’s a story where men can bring their dreams alive as well as escape into them. The story, including all the little details, is quite beautiful and I loved how it seemed like such a fairy tale. I also enjoyed how funny this book was at times, as well as vulgar and seems as though it is intended to be a parody of the time.
There were lots of little hidden jokes and meanings in the text. I’m sure that I didn’t pick up on them all. For example, in the beginning, the Emperor fights the ruler of the kingdom of Kuch Nahin, which means “nothing”. The Kingdom of Nothing. I also liked how he made the distinction between Jodha Bai and Mariam-uz-Zamani. Mariam was his real wife while Jodha Bai was a phantom. I interpret this to be Rushdie’s way of pointing out how the historical figure which people call Jodha Bai was never Jodha Bai – the name was incorrectly given to Mariam-uz-Zamani much later and so this is why Jodha Bai is a fictional being while Mariam is very real.
I didn’t like the parts that took place in Italy. I thought they were a little boring and a little complicated. I mostly enjoyed the parts that took place in the Mughal Court.
I’ve heard and read that The Enchantress of Florence is one of Rushdie’s easiest reads. If that’s the case, I’m not sure if I’d enjoy his previous works. But I really loved this one.
Click here to watch The Doha Debates – Muslim Women’s Freedom To Marry
Should Muslim women have the right to choose who they marry? Of course. I highly doubt many intellectuals would say no. This debate addresses this issue. Asra Nomani and Muhammad Habash argued that Muslim women should have the right to marry anyone they want, while Thuraya Al Arrayed and Yasir Qadhi argued that they should not be allowed to marry who they want.
Before you start thinking Thuraya Al Arrayed and Yasir Qadhi are horrible people, I should say that the topic title is a bit misleading. I really dislike how the question was posed: Do you think women should have the right to choose who they can marry? Although both sides address the issue of forced marriages, the debate is actually about whether or not Muslim women can marry non-Muslim men (or other women, for that matter).
Asra Nomani starts by talking extensively about how Muslim women are oppressed by forced marriages, which is true, but not really what this is all about, and not something that anyone on the panel disagreed with. She says that women should have the right to choose to marry absolutely anyone, regardless of religious prohibition. She argues the social aspect of the issue.
Muhammad Habash agrees with Nomani but attempts to address it from a religious perspective by saying that the traditional interpretation of the topic (Muslim women can’t marry non-Muslim men) is wrong. Personally, I don’t think he has the knowledge or qualifications for this.
On the other side is Yasir Qadhi, who agrees with Nomani’s point about forced marriages – they are wrong, against Islam, and it’s wrong that people use Islam to excuse it when it’s a cultural practice. But he also says that as a Muslim, you are to submit to the will of God and follow the rules and one of those rules is that Muslim women cannot marry non-Muslim men.
Thuraya Al Arrayed argued the social aspect as well, stressing that the acceptance and permission of the family is of utmost importance in a marriage. She also says that Islam gives women a right to choose within certain limits, which means Muslim women can’t marry non-Muslims.
For starters, I like that both sides had a female voice instead of a woman’s issue being talked about solely by men, as is often the case. But Yasir Qadhi is really the only person I agreed with in this debate. I felt that Nomani and Habash were too liberal to the extreme on one side, and even Al Arrayed was a little too traditional for me on the other.
I agree with almost nothing that Nomani says. At around 37:59 she accuses Qadhi of belittling women’s minds and the “you’ve got to be kidding me” look on the face of the girl in the gray hijab is priceless. (Or at least, I’d like to think that’s what she’s thinking.) I thought she was being pretty unfair to him and what he said throughout the entire debate, actually.
I’m all for moderation. I consider myself to be a feminist and a Muslim, but as a Muslim there are certain rules and guidelines that I hold myself to. One of those is that as a Muslim woman, I can’t marry a non-Muslim man. If you get rid of all the beliefs that go along with Islam, then what is left? Ultimately it is a personal choice, but I dislike it when people try to assert that Islam allows women to marry non-Muslim men.
I haven’t updated this in awhile.
I turned 20 two days ago.
I also slammed my finger in a door 2 days ago and it’s still numb.
I’ve made my final decision that I’m not going back to school this coming semester.
I’ve barely read anything.
I’ve been in a pretty great mood except for some epic depressions here and there.
I lost 20 lbs.
I’m pretty sure Mousavi is going to win the elections.
Is this post random enough for you yet?
Today has been a day of oddities.
In an effort to get more exercise and enjoy the beautiful weather and scenery, my friend and I took her dogs to a dog park. Now, when I hear “park” I expect a nice little bike path or sidewalk. This was more like hiking through the woods. It was gorgeous, but my God – I’m so out of shape. After about an hour of that we hit the part of the trail that took us downhill. All of a sudden we were accosted by a cameraman and a reporter for a local news channel. They were doing a story on ticks and interviewed my friend about it. Perfect timing – in sweats and t-shirts, hair all messed up, sweaty and no makeup. Great. I hope they edit me out.
Later, on my way to my car, I saw a very large Sikh man in white shalwar kameez, a gigantic beard, and a blaze orange turban wandering down the street looking completely lost. This was in the suburbs, mind you. Then he stared me down for a few minutes and waddled along his way. You don’t see that every day around here.
Finally, as I was nearing my house I came to a stop sign and waited for a man with his bike to pass. Normally I wouldn’t give it a second though, except that this guy was smoking a pipe, had a rickety old bicycle that looked like something out of Band of Brothers and was dressed in an old fashioned tweed suit. I’m pretty sure I don’t live in the English countryside circa 1942, so…?
It’s just been a very strange day.
