Heart-breaking

Three Muslim students were shot to death near their home at the University of North Carolina campus, reports the Guardian. The suspect has been arrested.

The motive is not yet known, but Muslims are understandably worried that the three students known for their career aspirations and humanitarian work were targeted for their religious beliefs.

Hatred and violence directed at any one group is wrong. Those who fear Islamic extremism need to understand that Muslims have suffered terribly under the hands of extremist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. The world has more than a billion Muslims, and they are a diverse group in and of themselves. A few are extremists. Blaming an entire group for the crimes of a few will deliver the chaos of the Middle East to communities elsewhere, including those in the United States. The country is better than this.

Parents are on the front line in combating the petty resentments that fuel extremism and recruits: "Parents must raise their children to detest the swagger, coercion and ‘holier than thou’ attitudes," I noted for the US Daily Review. Parents must train their children to calmly stand up to bullies and haters because silence signals acceptance of their atrocities. This applies to those of any belief.

The University of North Carolina offers rich resources for understanding Islamic art, culture and influences with the Carolina Center for the Study of the Middle East and Muslim Civilizations and professors like Glaire Anderson whose specialty is Islamic art and architecture during the caliphal period and artistic exchanges between Islam and Christianity, as well as female patronage.

Painting of Christian and Muslim Playing Ouds is courtesy of Alfonso X, the 13th century, and Wikimedia Commons.

Competition?

The intense clamor to cut costs won't stop with governments but could extend to charity, too. Some needs are too great to rely on resources delivered in an uneven way. A lack of food or shelter among large groups of people, inadequate education for entire communities of children, can pose a security risk.

Writing an opinion essay for Commonweal, Fran Quigley, a professor of law at Indiana University, proposes that the United States end the tax deduction for making charitable contributions, replacing the system with solid social welfare programs managed by government. Ending the deduction would provide an additional $50 billion annually to government coffers.

US citizens donate more than do citizens of other countries. "We Americans get to vote with our wallets on what kind of support we want to offer the poor, an arrangement hat suits our individualism as well as our suspicion of bureaucracy," Quigley writes, but adds, "The generosity of Americans, impressive though it is, does not meet the needs of America's poor." He goes on to describe research that suggests the recipients of charity often feel demeaned.

For some, certainly not all, the purpose of charity may be to alleviate guilt or instill a sense of superiority.

Rob Meiksins responds to Quigley's argument for NPQ, NonProfit Quarterly, pointing out that the deduction not simply addresses needs but also quality of life: "It is about ensuring that we have a deep and meaningful cultural base to our society that both entertains and challenges."

Such arguments inspired Allure of Deceit, a novel about charity gone wrong. Worries about inequality in charitable giving and misplaced priorities inspired an opinion essay, and work on the novel began soon afterward. Why does one school district get a windfall and not another? Why does society step aside from setting firm priorities?  "Tax deductions for charitable giving effectively put the public good in the hands of wealthy donors and pet causes – at the expense of government revenue for the fair and reliable provision of services," I wrote for the Christian Science Monitor four years ago.

Allure of Deceit picks up after the murder of a wealthy inventor and his wife while on their honeymoon. Their will and trust documents shock family and friends alike, and lead to creation of the world's largest family foundation to support programs in the developing world. The reason for the shock? The young wife had dedicated her research questioning the inequality of charitable giving as well as the connected history and etymology of "forgiving," "charity," and "wrongdoing," as detailed in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

The corrupt can give, too, and shape minds. Corruption and waste in government hurts all government programs, and the same applies to charities, too.

Photo of unemployed men, 1931, lined outside a soup kitchen, started in Chicago by gangster Al Capone, courtesy of US Information Agency and Wikimedia Commons. 

Contact Seventh Street Books for review copies of Allure of Deceit. 

Motives

Mystery writers and readers are among the most contented, stable, productive people I know, yet so many of our acquaintances question we feel compelled to read and write about crime and murder.

Rachel Franks offers an answer, in her essay, "Motive for Murder: Reading Crime Fiction," for the ALIA Biennial Conference - these stories teach us about ourselves:

"Crime fiction focuses on what it means to be human, and how complex humans are, because stories of murders, and the men and women who solve them, comment on what drives some people to take a life and what drives others to avenge that life which is lost."

And then she goes on to quote the late P.D. James and her 2009 book Talking About Detective Fiction:

"[N]ot by luck or divine intervention, but by human ingenuity, human intelligence and human courage. It confirms our hope that, despite some evidence to the contrary, we live in a beneficent and moral universe in which problems can be solved by rational means and peace and order restored from communal or personal disruption and chaos." (p. 174).

Readers of mysteries are determined to root out and destroy evil, to restore justice. The question "Why?" may be the most essential to solving problems and understanding others. The investigation is not so easy in the wake of cruelty and pain.

Silk Road

A number of cookbooks have focused on the Silk Road, the network of trade routes winding through Asia and Europe, but few are as ambitious as Silk Road Gourmet by Laura Kelley. She ties food and recipes of 30 nations with smart historical research and a keen sense of connections. Readers who enjoy a certain setting often want to try their hands at the cuisine - and for those who read about the Middle East, Central Asia, China and India, Kelley's books and blog are a treasure. She delves into historical records and editions in libraries and museums to explore crockery, processes, recipes. I first discovered her work by reading a BBC News article about onions that begins with a description of  Yale University's Babylonian Collection and the world's oldest known cookbooks on clay tablets. The article then goes on to praise Kelley's research and recipes.

"Exploring how food is a part of an ethnic group’s or nation’s material culture has always been a private interest of mine as well," her website notes. "Everywhere I went, I saw connections between cultures in their foods and big sweeping patterns of ingredients or methods of preparation sweeping across the Old World.  How the land and maritime routes of the Silk Road brought about an early period of globalization became the theme to express these ideas about food and the world."

One recipe from Kelley's widely acclaimed book that readers of Fear of Beauty will want to try: Chicken With Apricots in Lemon-Pepper Sauce. She notes the dish, spicy and sweet, is an example of the Persian influence on Afghan cooking. (Recall that the villagers of Laashekoh were refugees from earlier wars and migrated southeast through Afghanistan until settling in northern Helmand. Apricots have a role in the novel, along with pomegranates, cumin, saffron, raisins and other wonderful ingredients from the region).

Her recipe calls to mind an old favorite recipe from New England: roasted chicken with apricot-nut stuffing. The comparisons are not so outlandish considering that Kelley herself writes about "How Colonial Americans Were Inspired by Asian Spices": 

"When we think of the diets of our founding fathers and mothers, we imagine porridges, breads, fresh and preserved fruits and vegetables, and gently flavored roast meats.  What most people don’t realize is that the colonists had a taste for exotic fare from all over the world and would pay dearly for delicacies from India, China, Indonesia and other places far from the shores of North America. In addition to buying authentic food items, the colonists tried to recreate these dishes based on taste and the ingredients they had on hand."

The connections are constant in Kelley's work. Check out her blog for more recipes - and you won't be able to resist trying the entire collection! The love and attention that goes into her writing and research are inspiring.

Photo of women at an Afghan meal, courtesy of Wellcome Images and Wikimedia Commons.

Privacy

A caveat: In the midst of busy preparations for the release of Allure of Deceit, I have not seen the film American Sniper. Such war films have little to do with my books set in Afghanistan, even though a primary character of Fear of Beauty was an Army Ranger.

Chris Kyle, his story in American Sniper, stood apart among veterans for many reasons - a special skill, intense feelings, an ability to relay his story.

My stories address the workings of modern globalization by examining personal relations on the ground, eye to eye, along with village and family routines, the everyday and ordinary relations that are complicated enough without extra layers of social controls or conflict. Few of the American and Afghan characters in my stories seek out attention, and instead most strive to blend with their communities. They keep their motivations a secret and they grieve, plan, love, manipulate, dream in privacy - and that lends them a special strength.

Such characters often discover a special affinity with strangers.

Like my previous four novels, Allure of Deceit is story about parenting. Yet it's a story of several parenting styles, not just one. Parents make choices about how to raise their children and this influences entire communities. As such, the story is political and, like our world, the story is complicated and never one-sided.
Not to be missed: The essay "The United States of 'American Sniper'" by Kyle's teammate in The Wall Street Journal. Won't repeat and spoil his conclusion here, but will remind readers that many rights and privileges, challenges and conflicts, are tightly interconnected.

Photo of abandoned Afghan village, courtesy of Todd Huffman and Wikimedia Commons. The reason for the desertion is unknown, though Huffman speculates that occupants either fled to refugee camps in Pakistan or were killed during the war with the Soviet Union. Request a review copy. 

Hills

During heated arguments, some individuals keep their opinions to themselves, especially for the topics on which agreement is impossible.

On such topics, writers may strive for ambiguity by allowing - even encouraging - readers to reach their own conclusions. Abortion is one such topic.

The short story "Hills Like White Elephants," by Ernest Hemingway influenced the approach taken on abortion in Allure of Deceit. In either story, readers may not be sure about where exactly the writer stands on the topic. But one theme runs true - the urge for individuals to take control of another's life. Such quests are common even though men and women, too, often do not respect what they can readily control. For resolution of such stories, so much depends on a reader's own experiences and opinion.

"Hills" is about a couple engaging in what seems like a tired argument while waiting in a station bar for arrival of an express train to Madrid. The word "abortion" is not mentioned in the story, but the man exerts mild pressure, urging the woman to undergo a procedure, suggesting that it's "awfully simple" and "really an operation at all." The pregnancy, again not specified, looms over the relationship and, like it or not, will set the direction for its future course. The male character may recognize the decision is not his to make and demonstrates little responsibility for the outcome either way.

The story emerges through dialogue rather than characters' observations and description. "Hemingway's accurate ear for speech patterns duplicates the gender-linked miscommunications which exist between man and women in the real world," wrote Pamela Smiley for The Hemingway Review in 1998. As a result of these differences, there are two Jigs: the nurturing, creative, and affectionate Jig of female language, and the manipulative, shallow, and hysterical Jig of male language." Smiliey goes on to suggest there are also two sides to the male who is referred to as the American: "in the female language he is a cold, hypocritical and powerful oppressor; in the male language he is stoic, sensitive and intelligent victim."

Yet, the gender distinctions and who holds power may not be so clear-cut.

Another essential element of the dialogue in "Hills" are the questions and how they signal character transformation during the course of the story. There are 26 question marks in all. At first, most come from the female character, and they are shallow and needy, asking the man what they should drink, what the print says on a beaded curtain says, and whether her observation that the nearby hills look like white elephants is "bright."

Midway through the story, the man asks questions, too, as he nervously reaches understanding that Jig does not necessarily agree with him that the pregnancy should be terminated. Her questions continue, but they become more challenging, taking on the tone of orders: "What makes you think so?" "And if I do it you'll be happy and things will be like they were and you'll love me?" and "Can't we maybe stop talking?"

Toward the end, the man relies on questions to change the topic. Jig wants to nail down a description of the nearby hills, which she describes as "white elephants," and "lovely" and "with skin." The man interrupts by asking if she wants another drink.

In the end, the male character is left posing the final question, returning after re-positioning their luggage for the incoming train. He also stops for a drink alone in the bar, another sign that alcohol and time alone are methods for masking or dwelling on discontent. Upon his return, he asks if she feels better, hinting at the state of  hysteria described by Smiley. Jig's response, "There's nothing wrong with me. I feel fine," suggests her emotions run true. The female is not ill or damaged or fearful, and the pregnancy is not a leading problem for her.

The story is about a man pressing a woman who is initially uncertain about a course of action, and subtly demonstrates how the pressure strengthens her resolve. That could involve going ahead with the procedure or going ahead with the pregnancy and birth. Either way, Jig likely contemplates ending a relationship with the man who offers annoying lectures, as indicated by her plea for him to stop talking, accentuated by the word "please" used seven times.

The lack of trust and distance in the short exchange of dialogue is intense. Jig seeks reassurance that the couple can be happy again and resume their carefree ways. The male character's early confidence only increases her doubt about his role in her happiness. He focuses on immediate concerns, loving her "now" while insisting they cannot have "the whole world."

The male character presses her to take steps that will preserve their wandering ways, summed up in another pointed, judgmental question by Jig: "That's all we do, isn't it - look at things and try new drinks?" She is unsatisfied and yearns for more than an aimless life with a manipulative partner.

The story and dialogue take a sharp and ambiguous turn, as suggested in the long exchange without attribution toward the end when Jig talks about having the whole world and "everything." The man argues with her. By paragraph breaks and orderly dialogue progression, the line "We can go everywhere" should be Jig's and the line "once they take it away, you never get it back" belongs to the man. Yet someone speaks out of turn as the breaks do not show an even back or forth. The reader can only be certain about who is speaking again when the man urges the woman to "Come back in the shade" and chides that she "mustn't feel that way." If the dialogue had been orderly, that line should have been Jig's turn to respond. One character had two lines in a row, and this reader suspects it was the man toward the end of exchange.

The confusion is momentary as the characters speak in circles to the point of going into role reversal, seemingly for the sake of argument. Still, Jig's side of the dialogue offers keen recognition that, regardless of the decision, there is no going back.

Conservatives and liberals could embrace this story and yet neither can be exactly certain that the set of words will sway other readers to their way of thinking - and that is the story's power. Hemingway may have been undecided, too. He gives his readers the power to take their own stance.

~~~

The context for abortion in Allure of Deceit may be more manipulative - a tale about another procedure, supposed to be so easy and simple. Yet the attempt to exert control over another human does not work out as planned, sending out repercussions for others well into the future. Characters cannot control the feelings of others, unless of course those other characters want to be controlled.

Photo of the Ebro River in Spain courtesy of Nicola and Wikimedia Commons.

No limits

Pope Francis defends freedom of expression to a point.

"One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith." The Guardian reports the comments were made during his travel from Sri Lanka to the Philippines. "There is a limit. Every religion has its dignity ... in freedom of expression there are limits."

Every faith may have its dignity, but each also is riddled with corruption and cruelties that accompany power over others. Dignity is not about killing shoppers in a Kosher grocery store, storming offices of a satirical newspaper and killing staff and the police who guard them, beheading journalists or imposing archaic rules on Muslims in Syria or Iraq. It's not about ignoring and hiding hundreds of reports of children abused by priests over decades.

The world's religions are in competition. Globalization ensures ongoing debate, and satire ensures that key questions are heard by many. Satire may be in poor taste or miss the mark, still the wide range of ideologies demonstrates that some religious beliefs must be wrong. More likely, any spiritual message interpreted by humans is flawed, as indicated by a timeline on the history of free speech, also provided by the Guardian:

1633: Galileo answers to the Inquisition for the claim that the sun does not revolve around the earth.

1859: Fundamentalists attack Charles Darwin for the theory of natural selection.

1989: The Iranian leader issues a fatwa against author Salman Rushdie over "blasphemous" content. the fatwa is withdrawn in 1998.

The inability to embrace free speech for one's opponents in the constant global exchange of ideas demonstrates a lack of confidence and faith, often leading to bullying and coercion. Progress requires free speech on all topics, especially religion. Any attempts at control invite defiance.

The 1857 portrait, Galileo Facing the Roman Inquisition, courtesy of Cristiano Banti and Wikimedia Commons.