To Find the Principles

Anti-Israel Activism: Coming Soon to a Campus Near You!

2009-11-11T02:21:00.034-05:00

Well, here, actually. Next week.

It has been known for quite some time that the Hampshire College Students for Justice in Palestine were planning to hold a national event. The publicity contains the predictable slogans, descriptions, and claims.

What & Where: This fall from November 20th through the 22nd, students, faculty, and staff from around the country who are engaged in Palestine solidarity activism will converge for a conference on campus Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS). This conference has three key goals:

1) To co-educate and share resources amongst campus organizers on the process of initiating BDS campaigns on campuses
2) To strategize tactics to address the needs of different campuses in carrying out BDS campaigns
3) To bring together Palestine-solidarity campus groups that have or have not met under a larger network in order to strive towards a coordinated national BDS campaign.

There have been many BDS conferences around the country, but rarely have they focused exclusively on the campus movement. This conference therefore presents an exceptional and important opportunity for this movement.

Why: In July of 2005, “a clear majority of Palestinian civil society called upon international civil society organizations and people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel, similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era, until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with international law.” In addition, BDS is a non-violent means of protest and action that campuses in the United States can directly engage in to effectively stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people. A similar strategy was adopted in the struggle to end apartheid in South Africa in the 1970’s and 1980’s, and campus groups played a large role in helping spark and maintain that successful movement.

As campus members in the United States, we are directly complicit in perpetuating the injustices committed against the Palestinian people – our schools’ money is invested in companies that directly profit from Israel’s militarism, annexation of Palestinian land, and apartheid practices. After sixty-years of displacement, over forty-years of occupation, a two-year old siege, and in light of the recent invasion of Gaza and the continuing expansion of settlements in the West Bank, we must act now to cultivate the BDS movement in the United States. As members of academic communities, we can engage BDS as a means of applying economic and public pressure on Israel to abide by international law and we can change the discourse around Palestine/Israel in this country.

What struck me most, then, was another e-mail promoting the event, and not only because of its undisciplined typography (though it's pretty bad):

From: US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation (uscampaign@mail.democracyinaction.org)
Subject: Campus BDS: Hampshire Was First, Who's Next?

Boycotts Go Back to School!
This fall, as college students return to campus, the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, in partnership with Hampshire College Students for Justice in Palestine, is organizing a five-city boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) tour across the country.
Ever since the dynamic student organizers at Hampshire got their university to divest from corporations supporting Israeli occupation and apartheid, we have been planning with them how to spread successful campus boycott and divestment campaigns to other campuses around the country.

Now, for the BDS movement to claim that SJP "got their university [sic] to divest from corporations supporting Israeli occupation and apartheid" and can therefore teach others "how to spread successful boycott and divestment campaigns to other campuses" is rather like General William Westmoreland, fresh from Vietnam, boasting about his ability to teach a successful counterinsurgency campaign.

Both the US military and the SJPers can create whatever "narratives" they wish to in order to claim victory in this battle or that, but the fact remains, they failed to achieve their ultimate aims. In short: they lost.

I judge every political action by the dual standard of principle and pragmatism, and this one fails both tests. As readers of these pages know, I am opposed to the BDS movement, which I consider both unjust and wrongheaded for several reasons (blanket academic boycotts, which violate the very ethos of academe; and the misuse of the apartheid analogy, for a start). However, I don't want to fight that fight here. I'm not going to convince the SJP people, and they're not going to convince me, and that's fine. Another of my fundamental principles is not wasting time and energy.

I know that many members and supporters of SJP sincerely believe that they are fighting injustice and working for peace in a way that will benefit both sides. Some of us may even agree to some extent on the problems and the ultimate end, if not the means. In any case, I work well with colleagues and students on both sides of the issue. That is as it should be: We are duty-bound to engage one another respectfully in our formal and professional capacities, regardless of our personal views. However, one of the hallmarks of an intellectual community should be our willingness to engage one another’s personal and political views, when the occasion arises, with equal rigor and respect. In that respect, we have failed. Earlier this year, at the time of the fighting in Gaza and controversy over divestment, the atmosphere on campus became so tense and intolerant that it was commonly described as “toxic.” Many members of the community who dissented from the SJP view, which predominated in the public square, reported feeling silenced or intimidated.

The issue is not who was in the majority or minority, or “right” or “wrong.” Rather, it is that self-appointed guardians of political and ethical purity conveyed, by accident or design, the message that certain views were simply beyond the pale. The most dismaying thing was thus the lack of civil and serious conversation at an institution whose motto is, “to know is not enough.”

This is not merely a local problem, for our college is but a microcosm of the situation in American academe as a whole. The former PLO journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, who now works for the Jerusalem Post, was shocked when he visited the US around the same time and found himself threatened and denounced as a Nazi for questioning the simplistic anti-Israel orthodoxy:

Listening to some students and professors on these campuses, for a moment I thought I was sitting opposite a Hamas spokesman or a would-be-suicide bomber.

I was told, for instance, that Israel has no right to exist, that Israel’s 'apartheid system' is worse than the one that existed in South Africa and that Operation Cast Lead was launched only because Hamas was beginning to show signs that it was interested in making peace and not because of the rockets that the Islamic movement was launching at Israeli communities.

I never imagined that I would need police protection while speaking at a university in the U.S. I have been on many Palestinian campuses in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and I cannot recall one case where I felt intimidated or where someone shouted abuse at me.

Ironically, many of the Arabs and Muslims I met on the campuses were much more understanding and even welcomed my ‘even-handed analysis’ of the Israeli-Arab conflict. After all, the views I voiced were not much different than those made by the leaderships both in Israel and the Palestinian Authority. These views include support for the two-state solution and the idea of coexistence between Jews and Arabs in this part of the world.

A group of faculty and staff on our campus is working to promote a more civil climate befitting an institution of higher learning and will soon make itself heard. In the meantime, I am making my own plea here.

In that spirit of engagement and dialogue, then, let me address the question from the pragmatic angle and just make two points:

(1) Setting aside differences of interpretation about the political actions of either Israelis or Palestinians: Both sides agreed in 1993 to recognize one another, cease conflict and incitement, and work for peace. Helping to achieve peace, as has often been said, means being pro-peace rather than merely pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli. The BDS movement, however, demonizes and ascribes all blame to one side. Its members think that an increasingly isolated Israel will be either moved or forced to make concessions. The opposite is true. Nations do not show “flexibility” when they believe their vital interests or very existence to be at stake. One need but consider the evolution of the Israeli left, which enthusiastically supported the Oslo process but, in the wake of the Second Intifada and the conflicts in Lebanon and Gaza, has become increasingly skeptical and pessimistic.

It has often been said that Israel's popular songs are among the best barometers of national sentiment. It was a telling sign when the controversial war in Lebanon in 1982, widely viewed as a war of choice rather than necessity, failed to generate any memorable hits comparable to those of 1967 and 1973.

I cannot help but think of two Israeli hit songs from 1973 (Hed-Arzi Records, BAN 14133): It was the era in which things began to change. The (over)confidence of the aftermath of the Six Day War gave way to anguished self-examination in the era of the Yom Kippur War and declining sympathy abroad.

One song was called, "The Whole World is Against Us" (Ha'olam Kulo Negadenu). It was ironic and at once resigned and defiant. The key line was:

"The whole world is against us; never mind, we'll get by; we don't give a damn about them anyway."

The second song was called, "Next Year" (Be'shana Haba'ah), and unlike the first, it became quite famous, even abroad. It never mentioned war or peace or politics, but it was all about a world of peace and normality. It was a dream about the absence of war:

Next year we will sit on the porch and count migrating birds.
Children on vacation will play catch between the house and the fields.

You will yet see, you will yet see, how good it will be next year.

Red grapes will ripen till the evening, and will be served chilled to the table.
And languid winds will carry to the crossroads old newspapers and a cloud.

You will yet see, you will yet see, how good it will be next year.

Next year we will spread out our hands towards the radiant light.
A white heron like a light will spread her wings and within them the sun will rise.

You will yet see, you will yet see, how good it will be next year.

Each side has been unable to overcome the fear that it is faced by an implacable and untrustworthy enemy. Each bristles at being told that it is the more threatening and less forthcoming. That’s part of the problem. Let us agree that "ending the occupation" is a desirable goal (though that deceptively simple shorthand contains a world of complexity). However, each side will need to make painful compromises. In more positive and pointed terms, let us say: each side needs to feel that it must and can afford to take risks for peace.

In the case of Israel, then, the world should want to encourage the spirit reflected in “Next Year." A nation that believes peace to be within reach will strive for that goal. A nation that believes “The Whole World is Against Us” has no reason—indeed, would be foolish—to take great, much less, existential risks. That, unfortunately, is precisely the attitude that the BDS movement reinforces.

As much as I may incline toward the skeptical or even cynical (this is what comes of studying modern European history for a living), I am by nature a pragmatic and positive person who would rather accomplish something useful than score points or win abstract victories.

(2) Hence, my call here to focus on actions and organizations that can actually make a positive difference.

The Arab-Israeli conflict is a tragic and seemingly intractable one, which therefore divides the campus. However, it can also help to bring us together if we direct our efforts to support those in the region who want and seek peace: in Khaled Abu Toameh's words,

“Jews and Arabs” who “are still doing business together and studying together and meeting with each other on a daily basis because they are destined to live together in this part of the world . . . . ordinary Arab and Jewish parents who wake up in the morning [and] just want to send their children to school and go to work before returning home safely and happily.”

This year, Hampshire College has gained notoriety as a place of controversy and intolerance. Several of us who have agonized over the conflict there and atmosphere here have said that we would like to focus on investment in peace rather than divestment from Israel.

Students, acting on their own, have chosen to organize a conference on boycotts, sanctions, and divestment. That is their choice. How much more fitting it would be if the College, as such, could convene a conference on teaching respectful dialogue on the topic of the Middle East, the aim of which is understanding rather than defeating or even just persuading one’s interlocutor. Would it not be a greater intellectual and moral act to be able to train teams that can teach "how to spread successful dialogue campaigns to other campuses"?

And what better way to teach understanding and peace-making than by listening to those who are doing this hard work on the ground: Arabs and Israelis themselves? Many small and brave organizations have been creating the sort of dialogue that we need to emulate here. I hope to highlight some of their work in future postings. Here's one example, for a start: We have already hosted visitors from and sent students to the Arava Institute, where Israelis, Arabs, and others come together to learn cooperation in the context of environmental studies.

For that matter, why can we not establish a vigorous program of regular academic exchange involving Hampshire and Israeli and Palestinian students? We have arrangements with Berlin and Olomouc—why not Jerusalem?

Many of us here, I believe and hope, would prefer that Hampshire be known as a leader in bridge-building rather than boycotts, dialogue rather than divestment, and scholarly exchange rather than sanctions. What better role for an institution that likes to claim the title of leading innovative and experimenting college in the country?

Cartouche from "Palestine," in Conrad Malte-Brun, Atlas Complet (Paris, 1812)

Grapevine and tent with the words, "Palestine" and (in Hebrew) "Israel,"

presumably an echo of Micah 4:4 and Numbers 4:5:

"But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig-tree; and none shall make them afraid";

"How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, and thy tabernacles, O Israel!"

Count Me Out

2009-11-06T02:43:00.004-05:00

We have to develop a counternarrative to explain what we do; we don't need more [if there were an html code for scornful tone of voice, I would insert it before this noun] "data"!

— colleague, in debate about the means of improving student retention and measuring educational outcomes

One of the big buzzwords in education and management, and—well, come to think of it—almost every field of endeavor is "assessment." I once went to a whole conference dedicated to it, though I didn't realize it till I got there. Boy, was that a mistake (and this, even before the airport was snowed in and the foundation didn't want to spring for the hotel room; but I digress). I thought we were going there to share project results, and we did that, but a large portion of the weekend was devoted to rather inane lectures and exhortations on the topic of assessment. And in case we forgot any of the material, one hectoring consultant gave us each a free mousepad on which were imprinted the seven principles of "planning an evaluation." An object to be treasured.

It's easy to make fun of this drivel, but I know that there was an underlying purpose. Individuals and organizations are increasingly held accountable: to demonstrate effective use of funds, or simply to document their claims. And, in order to do that, one has to have evidence. Most claims about performance are expressed in terms that are comparative and thus at least implicitly measurable. Indeed, how can you possibly tell—much less, demonstrate to someone else— that whatever you are doing has increased or improved without recourse to some quantitative measure?

I can understand and sympathize with some of the faculty resistance to the creeping culture of consultants, what is seen as administrative micromanagement or surveillance, and so forth. At least these are things that one can debate. It's similar to the problem of "No Child Left Behind" and an emphasis on standardized testing that leads to "teaching to the test" rather than teaching in order to convey anything of greater substance. Fine.

Far deeper and more dismaying, though, is the inveterate resistance to measurement, as such, indeed, the notion that any sort of quantifiable evidence is weaker than descriptive or anecdotal evidence, by definition a "fiction," and generally just not something to be taken seriously.

One thing that always amazes me: No one ever (well, until the previously cited speaker and others of a like mind—or mindlessness) boasts about being illiterate, yet it is all too common to hear supposedly educated academics say, "oh, I don't understand graphs," or "statistics confuse me."

Already two decade ago, John Allen Paulos observed, with alarm:

Innumeracy, an inability to deal comfortably with the fundamental notions of numbers and chance, plagues far too many otherwise knowledgeable citizens. The same people who cringe when words such as 'imply' and 'infer' are confused react without a trace of embarrassment to even the most egregious of numerical solecisms. I remember once listening to someone at a party drone on about the difference between 'continually' and 'continuously.' Later that evening we were watching the news, and the TV weathercaster announced that there was a 50 percent chance of rain for Saturday and a 50 percent chance for Sunday, and concluded that there was therefore a 100 percent chance of rain that weekend. The remark went right by the self-styled grammarian, and even after I explained the mistake to him, he wasn't nearly as indignant as he would have been had the weathercaster left a dangling participle. In fact, unlike other failings which are hidden, mathematical innumeracy is often flaunted: 'I can't even balance my checkbook.' 'I'm a people person, not a numbers person.' Or 'I always hated math.'

He has some explanations:

Part of the reason for this perverse pride in mathematical ignorance is that its consequences are not usually as obvious as are those of other weaknesses.

He further attributes this arrogant ignorance in part to flawed education, but mainly to psychological factors:

Some people personalize events excessively, resisting an external perspective, and since numbers and an impersonal view of the world are intimately related, this resistance contributes to an almost willful innumeracy.

Quasi-mathematical questions arise naturally when one transcends one's self, family, and friends. How many? How long ago? How far away? How fast? What links this to that? Which is more likely? How do you integrate your projects with local, national, and international events? with historical, biological, geological, and astronomical time scales?

People too firmly rooted to the center of their lives find such questions uncongenial at best, quite distasteful at worst. Numbers and 'science' have appeal for these people only if they're tied to them personally

—Innumeracy (NY, 1988), 3-4, 80-81

Solipsism over statistics: perfectly explains what I see around me every day.

Whatever the explanation, it's really a disgrace. Or is it an embarrassment? Oh, well, seven of one, a half dozen of another.

Eye-Sore

2009-11-06T01:25:00.009-05:00

"We're still tied up in the word and the number and that old hierarchy. The image was there before the word, and we are really going very fuddy-duddy."

—faculty member, in discussion of curriculum and standards, criticizing the emphasis on improving student writing, analytical reasoning, and quantitative skills

Huh?

Can't remember when I last heard the term, "fuddy-duddy." Come to think of it, anyone old enough to use it without irony must have become one himself.

Dude! It's the twenty-first century. Time to put those bell bottoms out for the tag sale.

Not quite sure why, if the image was there before the word, it is regressive to emphasize the latter. Then again, if you don't value logical reasoning . . . And as for that "number" stuff: try making sense of the financial crisis or healthcare reform without it.

The Write Stuff

2009-11-06T00:52:00.008-05:00

"I'm curious as to why we think all students need to write well."
—faculty member in discussion about requirements and standards

Oh, I don't know:

Because this is an institution of higher learning?

So that they won't be illiterate idiots?

Geez.

In fairness, I believe the point had something to do with the need to value visual arts and expressive culture, as well. No argument there, in principle.

The fact remains, however: Many skills are important, but in a given context, there are hierarchies. There is, after all, a reason that, when I go to the Registry of Motor Vehicles to renew my driver's license, I am given a vision rather than hearing test.

And colleagues wonder why people hold us and our institutions of higher learning in such low esteem.

Amherst Then and Now: "a rat-tailed, razzle-dazzle ball of energy," or "paranoia—punch-drunk with intellectualism"?

2009-11-05T01:58:00.006-05:00

Amherst Town Meeting concluded in what seemed to be record time: a mere two sessions. All proposed measures, from zoning changes to the controversial proposal to bring Guantanamo detainees here, passed.

As we stand poised between politics and history, I am reminded of the epigraph of Frank Prentice Rand's The Village of Amherst: A Landmark of Light a pretentiously titled but in fact very useful volume from our centennial era (Amherst Historical Society, 1958):

Parable

Three men were, as the saying goes, looking at Amherst, and loving her.
One of them said, "She's a madonna lily,"
"Do you mean that she's like a madonna lily?"
"No, she is a madonna lily."
Another said, "She's a rat-tailed, razzle-dazzle ball of energy."
The third man said, "She's paranoia—punch-drunk with intellectualism."
A small boy, who had been hiding, blew a strident toot on his toy trumpet, and ran away to join his playmates at Hartling Stake.

Okay. I have no idea what it means, either.

Guantanamo in Amherst

2009-11-04T22:35:00.005-05:00

Amherst Town Meeting approves measure to invite cleared Guantanamo
detainees--overwhelmingly, by voice vote.
Sent from my iPhone

Breaking news: Anthropologist Claude Lévi-Strauss dead at age 100

2009-11-03T11:20:00.002-05:00

Claude Lévi-Strauss est mort
L'anthropologue et ethnologue Claude Lévi-Strauss est mort dans la nuit de samedi à dimanche à l'âge de 100 ans, indique, mardi 3 novembre, l'Ecole des hautes études en sciences sociales.

Rededication of Amherst's South Church After Preservation Work and Energy-Efficiency Improvements

2009-11-01T23:59:00.005-05:00

Nick Grabbe, "South Church celebrates 'new life'," Amherst Bulletin, 30 October:

South Congregational Church has just completed more than $500,000 in structural and energy efficiency improvements to its 1824 building on the South Amherst common.

At this Sunday's 10 a.m. service, the building will be rededicated. During her sermon, the Rev. Caroline Meyers will display items that were found in the walls, including old church bulletins, newspapers and nails, a beveled mirror, and a jelly jar with jelly still in it.

"The church really wants to make a pledge to the future of the church that says this building is not just for us," Meyers said. "We see it as a place where we want to continue to be a community of the faithful for generations to come." (read the rest)

It is interesting to note the contrast with North Church. The latter has far fewer members, struggled heroically to come up with the funds for emergency repairs following storm damage to the steeple and roof, and then saw its plea for a modest $ 7000 in Community Preservation Act funds to complete the repairs rejected at last spring's Town Meeting. Both churches are "contributing structures" in their respective national historic register districts, and we can only hope that both will continue to generate the loyalty and resources that they need. They are part of the cultural patrimony (as the French would say) of the town as a whole.

Dickinson Damage Day 7

2009-11-01T23:58:00.005-05:00

The new website of the Emily Dickinson Museum went live at the end of last week, and it contains the good news that the Museum reopened on October 31, "with a new tour highlighting Emily Dickinson's relationship to her brother's family next door."

it also reports on the damage from the ceiling collapse, in the form of both the original press release:

AMHERST, MASS.--On the afternoon of Oct. 25, the plaster ceiling in the front parlor of the Emily Dickinson Museum’s Homestead fell into the room. Although the building was open for tours, no one was in the room at the time of the incident; there were no injuries to staff or visitors. In order to complete a thorough safety review of the facility and assess the extent of the damages, the Emily Dickinson Museum will be closed Oct. 26 to 30 and/or until the building undergoes a full inspection. An estimate of the value of the damages is forthcoming.

and this update (with photo):

IN THE SIX YEARS SINCE ITS ESTABLISHMENT IN 2003, the Emily Dickinson Museum has taken giant steps in preservation, restoration, and maintenance of its two historic buildings and landscape. The Museum has completed several assessment, documentation and planning studies of the buildings and grounds, as well as preparation of a master plan for overall restoration. We’ve also kept up a brisk pace of preservation projects: restoration of the Homestead’s exterior to its nineteenth-century colors, replacement of its electrical system, new state-of-the art fire detection systems in both historic houses, perimeter drainage around both houses to solve moisture problems, as well as numerous smaller projects. Most recently, the Museum Board spearheaded a stellar restoration of the historic hedge and fence along the 1,000-foot southern property line.

EVEN WITH THIS FULL RECORD OF STEWARDSHIP AND RESTORATION, SURPRISES HAPPEN. One such bolt from the blue was the October 25 ceiling collapse in the Homestead parlor. The cause of the incident is being reviewed as part of a structural investigation. The plaster was not part of the original house fabric, but had been installed during the twentieth century. Photographs of the dramatic event show the entire front parlor ceiling lying across the room with furniture and objects only partially visible behind the sheet of plaster. Miraculously, and thankfully, no one was hurt. Just as astonishing is that damage to artifacts was very limited. Among half a dozen pieces of furniture, only one was seriously damaged, and of half a dozen smaller artifacts belonging to Emily Dickinson's family, only one suffered harm. This incident highlights the tremendous challenges facing those responsible for the stewardship of our nation's historic and cultural sites.

Halloween, Angels, and Demons: Now That's Scary!

2009-11-01T00:05:00.015-04:00

Barry Rubin relates another tale of the solicitude or squeamishness of American schools, drawn from his 10-year-old son's experience as a visitor in the Maryland school system. Earlier postings involved the tendency to discourage aggressiveness and praise even mediocre performance on the playing field, a reluctance to discuss September 11 because it was not "pleasant," and the banning of violent themes even in a fantasy writing assignment. This one has to do with the dangers of Halloween:

In the United States, mainly, there is a holiday called Halloween which involves dressing up in costumes. The holiday has a bit of a morbid side to it, often focussing on things related to monsters and death. Today, the school had the kids wear the costumes to class, which is not necessarily the best use of time in academic terms.

However, and I never heard of this happening before--my 10-year-old son Daniel reports from the front--that certain costumes are forbidden, that is those deemed too scary for the younger children to see. For example, a student wearing a skeleton costume was asked to take it off, while others were forbidden from wearing masks thought to be too frightening.

I can think of a lot of political figures whose visage is far more scary than any imaginery goblins and ghouls. But I digress.

Yeah, so can I. But I can think of something even scarier: the superstition and credulity of the American population. The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life informs us that a solid majority believes in apparitions and evil supernatural powers:

According to a 2007 Pew Research survey, two-thirds of Americans (68%) completely or mostly agree that angels and demons are active in the world (and not just on Halloween). Just 14% completely disagree with this idea. Among religious groups, Mormons (88%), evangelical Christian (87%) and members of historically black churches (87%) are the most likely to agree that angels and demons are active in the world. Jewish Americans are by far the most likely to disagree that these spirits stalk the planet (73% disagree with 52% completely disagreeing). Buddhists (56% disagree), Hindus (55%) and the religiously unaffiliated (54%) are other faith groups disagreeing that angels and demons exist in our world. Happy Halloween!

By contrast, barely a quarter of Americans believe, in some form or fashion, in evolution. It may be even worse than that. Pew Research, dislocating a shoulder to pat itself on the back, boasts of the subtlety of its question and accuracy of its method. Well, the only reason it got an answer that topped the 25-percent mark was because it framed the question in such a pusillanimous way:

Pew Research's formulation provides a significantly more positive description of the scientific position by characterizing natural selection as "a natural process" rather than something "God had no part in." This implicitly allows people who believe that God or a supreme being set the evolutionary process in motion, or even shaped it in some way, to still opt for "natural selection" as the main engine of evolution.

Well, that's very nice, if you want to know what people think about "natural selection" in a way that neither Darwin nor modern science would understand the term. Natural selection without chance is not natural selection.

By contrast, when Gallup forthrightly framed the poll statement as, "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process," only 14 percent assented.

Now, if you glance back up at the Pew results on angels and demons, you'll recall that 14 percent of the population absolutely reject such superstition. Coincidence?

Either way, it's pretty bad: Pew and Gallup arrived at nearly identical results by at least one measure, concluding, respectively, that 42 and 44 percent of Americans are believers in creationism.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Halloween in a Colonial Cemetery

2009-10-31T23:44:00.007-04:00

West Cemetery in Amherst, view from the western end of the 1730 Knoll

31 October: Reformation Day

2009-10-31T22:53:00.011-04:00

For Americans, October 31 is just Halloween. For Protestant Germans, though, it is Reformation Day—the anniversary of the date on which, by tradition, Martin Luther nailed his "95 Theses" to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg. The only problem is: the story perhaps never happened that way. For over four decades, scholars have been debating the issue. (Even official town and museum websites have taken conflicting stances over the years.)

To be sure, Luther dated the document 31 October, but there is no hard evidence that he actually nailed the theses to the door—though this was the common practice for scholarly disputations. In any case, any door to which Luther might have nailed anything is long gone: the church was destroyed by cannon fire in 160, during the Seven Years' War, and the building we see today therefore dates from only 1770, with additional restorations from the end of the nineteenth century. The bronze doors that now bear the text of the Theses were created only in 1858.

Regardless of whether Luther actually nailed his abstruse Latin Theses to the door, they immediately attracted attention, as supporters reproduced and circulated them. He soon saw the advantage of addressing a wider public, and the sermon on grace and indulgences of 1518, which presented the ideas of the Theses in popular form, went through 25 printings in two years. Henceforth, both proponents and opponents of the Reformation fought their battles in print as well as in the pulpits and streets. In particular, they found that the cheap, small, brochure (sometimes illustrated) was the ideal weapon. 9000 German pamphlets appeared in the first three decades of the sixteenth century. The share of vernacular texts in the market increased by a factor of seven between 1519 and 1522 alone. In a profound sense then, Luther's ability to grasp the power of the press and the new medium of print was analogous to or anticipatory of the revolutionary development of blogging and social networking in our own day.

Illustration: the unveiling of biblical truth by the Reformation, bronze commemorative medal marking the 400th anniversary of the Reformation, Weimar, 1817

* * *

Some Germans nowadays celebrate Halloween in the American style, but the date retains its traditional religious significance: German Catholics still celebrate November 1 and 2 as the traditional Allerheiligen and Allerseelen (All Saints Day and All Souls). Protestants commemorate the dead on Totensonntag (Sunday of the Dead, sometimes translated as Mourning Sunday; also Ewigkeitssonntag: literally, Sunday of Eternity ) on the last Sunday before Advent.

28 October 1918: Founding of the Czechoslovak Republic

2009-10-29T02:42:00.024-04:00

On 28 October 1918, as the military power of the Central Powers began to fail and dissension within the Austro-Hungarian Empire grew, the Czechoslovak National Council in Prague acted on its Declaration of Independence of ten days earlier and brought the new state into existence.

After castigating at length the sins of the Habsburg Empire and citing "our historic and natural right" to a sovereign political existence dating back to the seventh century, the document concluded:

We, the nation of Comenius, cannot but accept these principles expressed in the American Declaration of Independence, the principles of Lincoln, and of the declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen. For these principles our nation shed its blood in the memorable Hussite Wars 500 years ago; for these same principles, beside her allies, our nation is shedding its blood today in Russia, Italy, and France.
. . . .
The Czecho-Slovak State shall be a republic. In constant endeavour for progress it will guarantee complete freedom of conscience, religion and science, literature and art, speech, the press, and the right of assembly and petition.

The Church shall be separated from the State. Our democracy shall rest on universal suffrage; women shall be placed on an equal footing with men, politically, socially, and culturally. The rights of the minority shall be safeguarded by proportional representation; national minorities shall enjoy equal rights. The government shall be parliamentary in form and shall recognize the principles of initiative and referendum. The standing army will be replaced by militia.

The Czecho-Slovak Nation will carry out far-reaching social and economic reforms; the large estates will be re-deemed for home colonization; patents of nobility will be abolished. Our nation will assume its part of the Austro-Hungarian pre-war public debt; the debts of this war we leave to those who incurred them.

In its foreign policy the Czecho-Slovak Nation will accept its full share of responsibility in the reorganization of eastern Europe. It accepts fully the democratic and social principle of nationality and subscribes to the doctrine that all covenants and treaties shall be entered into openly and frankly without secret diplomacy.

Our constitution shall provide an efficient, rational, and just government, which will exclude all special privileges and prohibit class legislation.

Democracy has defeated theocratic autocracy. Militarism is overcome - democracy is victorious; on the basis of democracy mankind will be recognized.

The forces of darkness have served the victory of light - the longed-for age of humanity is dawning.

We believe in democracy - we believe in liberty - and liberty evermore.

Given in Paris, on the eighteenth of October, 1918.

Professor Thomas G. Masaryk, Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.
General Dr. Milan R. Stefanik, Minister of National Defence.
Dr. Edward Benes, Minister of Foreign Affairs and of Interior.

One man recalled his youthful escapades of 28 October:

When Austria collapsed and when Czechoslovakia was declared an independent state, there was big jubilation in the streets, and people were tearing down the Austrian eagle. One man lifted me on his shoulders and I removed one, from the police station.

Unfortunately, the "longed-for age of humanity" did not last long. The Nazis detested the new state, which they regarded as, if not quite a monstrosity, such as Poland, then nonetheless a usurper of German lands and rights. The betrayal at Munich on 30 September 1938, when erstwhile allies Britain and France forced Czechoslovakia to cede its western territories to Germany or face the blame for starting a world war, in effect marked the end of the state. Although the Nazis did not invade and occupy the rest of Czechoslovakia until 15 March 1939, the country had lost its morale, along with its eminently defensible borders.

The Nazis made their scorn, and their ultimate plans, all too clear when, already in October 1938—just 10 days after Munich and more than 5 months before the occupation of the rest of the country in 1939—they issued the following mock statement. In it, the "parents," "Ex-President Benesch" (the deliberately Germanized spelling of Beneš) and the League of Nations thank the world for the expressions of condolences sent in response to the passing of their "beloved child Czechoslovakia," which lived for only 20 years from its birth in the cradle of Versailles to its deathbed in Munich. Clear enough for anyone with eyes to see, one would think. And yet the world remained blind.

This photo is of my own copy of the document, but I also saw one on display in Prague last summer, in a wonderful exhibit on the history of the Republic at the National Museum. It was one of several shows marking the seventieth anniversary of the events of 1938-39. Another, at the Army Museum, commemorated the days of "Mobilization 1938," when the nation enthusiastically answered the call to arms before the tragedy of Munich. (I hope to write in more detail about them in this space at a later point.) It is virtually impossible for us, here and today, to imagine how the citizens loved that republic, and what its betrayal and destruction meant to them.

And after the War? The republic was of course reestablished, but under the communist regime established in 1948, 28 October was transformed from Independence Day into "Nationalization Day," commemorating the 1945 state takeover of banks, utilities, and major industries and businesses. The policy of the immediate postwar regime was a parallel assault on the ethnic German population and the propertied elements. By making this day a holiday, the communists sent the message of continuity and completion: the creation of the First Republic had achieved independence, a bourgeois political revolution, which necessarily had to be followed by a proletarian social revolution. Today, 28 October is once again the national holiday, though the irony that "it commemorates the founding of a state that no longer exists"—the Czechs and Slovaks, after all, parted company in 1992—has not escaped notice. Czech Radio addressed this issue in an interesting broadcast in 2006.

commemorative marker on Wencelas Square, Prague

[reinserted inadvertently deleted image and caption]

Damage at the Dickinson Museum

2009-10-27T23:55:00.006-04:00

Imagine my surprise when I returned from a day trip on Sunday to learn from my wife that there had been something of an incident at work: the ceiling in the parlor of the Emily Dickinson Homestead had fallen in—this on a regular weekend, with tours going on. Fortunately, no one was hurt.

When I heard of a ceiling collapse, my first thought was: hunks of plaster and a cascade of dust coming down. In this case, however, the whole ceiling, still attached to its framing material, evidently came down in one piece. Pretty scary, and thus all the more fortunate that no one was hurt. On the bright side, the structure of the house was sound, and only this more recent finish layer fell down. The Museum will provide further details once it has had a chance to remove the fallen ceiling material and study the situation.

Early press coverage:

• WBZ TV 38, Boston, citing the AP: "Falling Plaster Damages Emily Dickinson Artifacts":

AMHERST, Mass. (AP) ― A partial ceiling collapse at the Emily Dickinson Homestead in Amherst has damaged some historical artifacts and forced a temporary closure of the museum.

Executive Director Jane Wald says plaster from a ceiling in the parlor area fell on Sunday, damaging a teapot, sofa and set of chairs. The museum was open for tours at the time, but no one was in the room and no one was harmed.

Wald said it would be several more days until the cost of the damage is determined. She said the plaster that fell was not original to the house. The homestead will be closed to the public until Saturday for cleanup and repairs.

The 19th-century home of poet Emily Dickinson has been open to the public since 1965 when it was purchased by Amherst College.

• Daily Hampshire Gazette: "Ceiling collapses at Dickinson family home"

Tuesday, October 27, 2009
AMHERST - The front parlor ceiling collapsed at the Emily Dickinson Homestead Sunday afternoon, damaging some of the museum's historic artifacts.

No one was injured in the incident, but a Dickinson family teapot, sofa and set of chairs were among the items damaged by the collapse. The homestead will be closed from Oct. 26 to Oct. 30.

Jane Wald, executive director of the museum, said in a press release that the cause of the accident is still under investigation, and that a damage estimate is forthcoming.

"The plaster from the ceiling fell into the room," Wald said in a phone interview.

The fallen plaster was not original to the home, and no beams fell from the second story floor, Wald said.

"The cleanup activity hasn't started yet. We are going to be having a structural evaluation of the spaces in the homestead. We want to have that done before we have too much activity in the house," Wald said. "Until we are able to get into the room to clean up the debris, we won't be able to assess the damage to the artifacts in the room." (read the rest)

There's an interesting difference in coverage here. The Gazette title is more dramatic. However the AP report focuses on damage to artifacts. Actually, though, both reports err if they give the impression of specific damage to collection holdings. What they are no doubt referring to is a summary of objects in the room at the time of the accident. Although one may speculate as to what was damaged or what survived, no one can tell for sure until the debris is cleared, and the Museum has not said.

Dedication of Plaque Honoring Robert Frost and the Jones Library

2009-10-27T22:34:00.023-04:00

This past week has witnessed a string of events celebrating Robert Frost's life in, and long connection to, Amherst. It was a unique connection, for not only did he live, teach, and write here: Amherst is also home to an unrivaled collection of Frostiana, thanks to the foresight of librarian Charles R. Green. Soon after taking charge of the Jones Library in 1921, Green began to collect Frost's papers as well as publications. Current Curator of Special Collections Tevis Kimball, has, since her arrival in 2001, made a sustained effort to promote and care for the holdings associated with Frost, Dickinson, and other local poets.

Portrait of Robert Frost: Frost Library, Amherst College

Writing in last week's Bulletin, Bonnie Wells provided a nice overview of the history and significance of the Frost collection:

The yellowed manuscript bears the spidery script of the poet Robert Frost. Best of all, it offers a window on the evolution of one of the four-time Pulitzer Prize-winning poet's best-loved works.

In the draft of "Stopping by Woods On a Snowy Evening," words and lines are crossed out and substitutions made. "A falling flake" becomes "a downy flake." "Between a forest and a lake" becomes the final "Between the woods and frozen lake."

"You can see the poet at work," said Tevis Kimball, curator of special collections at the Jones Library in Amherst, where the manuscript is one of some 12,000 items in the Frost Collection. (read the rest)

It was that particular connection that earned the Jones Library status as a "literary landmark" from the Association of Library Trustees, Advocates, Friends and Foundations (ALTAFF).

The ceremony was originally scheduled to be held near where the commemorative plaque will be affixed to the wall at the main entrance. Heavy rains, however, forced the event indoors. It was probably a more congenial setting, and in any case, we fared better than our poor neighbors in Hadley, who had scheduled a host of outdoor activities for their 350th-anniversary "History Fair Weekend." I'm sure that it was not too problematic to move some of the craft and other "living history" demonstrations indoors, but what about the military ones? The website explained:

Firing Drills will be at 11 am, 1 pm and 3 pm. In case of heavy rain, please go to the Most Holy Redeemer Church.

(Guns and rosaries, anyone??)

Accepting the honor on behalf of the Jones Library, Director Bonnie Isman said that the plaque really "celebrates poetry and poets in Amherst as a whole." "Power is in poetry," she declared, for as Frost himself put it, "I'm not a teacher, I'm an awakener." She recalled her own youth: Little did she imagine, when she as a child read "Stopping By Woods on a Snowy Evening," that she would one day become the director of the institution that owned the manuscript of that poem. It was therefore important to understand, she continued, that the award honored not just poets and poetry, but also the keepers of poets: the collection's originator, Charles Green, and the current Special Collections librarians Tevis Kimball and Kate Boyle. Without the librarians and archivists, essential pieces of our cultural heritage would not have been preserved.

Amherst Select Board Chair Stephanie O'Keeffe praised the Jones as "another jewel in Amherst's very impressive crown of cultural and literary attractions." Cultural tourism, she predicted, "will become an increasingly important industry," distinctive of western Massachusetts. The collections of Frost, Dickinson, and other literary figures housed in the Jones library of this small New England town "would be the envy of major metropolitan libraries."

Our State Senators Ellen Story and Stan Rosenberg are deeply dedicated to their district, and what is more, have been especially committed to lending their support, in word, deed, and presence to our cultural endeavors. Although other obligations prevented Ellen from attending, Stan was present and began his remarks by noting that the Jones would also be honored this week at the State House. "As some of you may know," he deadpanned, "I'm in politics." [predictable laughter] "We're not supposed to like the arts or even be able to talk about them." But the arts were in fact essential, he insisted. He then proceeded to cite (after his fashion), the famous 1780 letter from John Adams to his wife Abigail (here in the accurate original):

I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study ~~Painting and Poetry~~ Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History, Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine .

Unfortunately, Stan ruthlessly abridges and recycles the text. I suppose I can console myself for the loss of "Naval Architecture" (it hardly trips off the tongue, and most people have no idea what it is) and other items for the sons, but it pains me when he stops at painting and poetry and leaves out the other fine and especially decorative arts (to hear a statesmen speak of a "right" to study "Tapestry and Porcelaine" is to open a new window onto the democratic and cultural promise of the Republic). It's a great letter, I've known it for ages, and I still love to hear it. However, I've also heard our distinguished State Senator use it on at least half a dozen occasions—and I attend only a fraction of the events at which he appears. I mean, really, Stan, get some new material. It's time to retire that old warhorse before it becomes an old nag.

Robert Frost's granddaughter Lesley Lee Francis gave the most distinctive performance, characterized by idiosyncratically fast-paced and somewhat meandering remarks. Drawing upon her book, Robert Frost: An Adventure in Poetry, 1900-1918, she recounted episodes from his family life and role as both father and progressive writing teacher to his children. Because William Pritchard had read "October" earlier in the week, she instead decided to read "My November Guest," which proved singularly appropriate to the meteorological conditions:

My Sorrow, when she's here with me,
Thinks these dark days of autumn rain
Are beautiful as days can be;
She loves the bare, the withered tree;
She walks the sodden pasture lane.

Chamber of Commerce Director Tony Maroulis, like Stephanie O'Keeffe, called attention to the growing importance of cultural tourism as a clean and therefore desirable form of economic development. He declared that "arts, education, and culture define our community," singling out the role of the Jones Library. The institution that he called "the heart of Amherst," in both the physical and figurative senses, attracts some 350,000 visitors per year. It is, accordingly, "the busiest place in Amherst at any given time," which brings a great deal of revenue to the town when users visit nearby restaurants, cafes, and other businesses.

The "reveal" (as they say on home improvement and decorating shows):

Jones Library Trustee Chair Pat Holland and State Senator Stan Rosenberg unveil the plaque.

"To the Jones Library

my first serious collector and

longtime friend under Charles Green"

—Robert Frost

The events this week not only formed part of the Amherst 250th anniversary celebrations, but also coincided with the 50th anniversary of the dedication of the original Frost Room at the Jones Library during the town's bicentennial in 1959. In this 250th anniversary year, the Historical Commission has sponsored and won Community Preservation Act funding for four related projects: three at the Jones Library: renovations of the old roof, an engineering survey of climate control systems in Special Collections, conservation and digitization of Special Collections holdings; and the creation of the Amherst Writer's Walk, establishing markers at the homes of Amherst literary figures, including one of Frost's former residences.

43 Sunset Avenue, where Frost lived from 1931 to 1938

[fixed broken image links]

Evolution Update: Profile of Harun Yahya

2009-10-25T02:53:00.003-04:00

As chance would have it, not long after our Hampshire conference on evolution and the Muslim world, there appears an article nicely complementing Ronald Numbers's keynote lecture. Writing in the current New Humanist, Halil Arda offers a damning profile of the leading Islamic creatonist in "Sex, flies and videotape: the secret lives of Harun Yahya":

Inspired by the high profile of its Christian American counterpart, Muslim creationism is becoming increasingly visible and confident. On scores of websites and in dozens of books with titles like The Evolution Deceit and The Dark Face of Darwinism, a new and well-funded version of evolution-denialism, carefully calibrated to exploit the current fashion for religiously inspired attacks on scientific orthodoxy and “militant” atheism, seems to have found its voice. In a recent interview with The Times Richard Dawkins himself recognises the impact of this new phenomenon: “There has been a sharp upturn in hostility to teaching evolution in the classroom and it’s mostly coming from Islamic students.”

The article focuses as much on Yahya's personal foibles as his fradulent science.

Conclusion: "He is a deluded megalomaniac who has artfully exploited the global resurgence of religious sentiment to cheat us all. A ludicrous man for ludicrous times." (read the rest)

Evolution Update: Continuing to Celebrate Darwin

2009-10-25T02:52:00.004-04:00

Vancouver Evolution Festival: A friend was kind enough to send me the publicity for this Canadian contribution to the Darwin Year. It's an ambitious program and an attractive design.

Chinese Motivational Slogans

2009-10-05T02:35:00.010-04:00

Just in case military parades and other festive events are not enough to celebrate the Revolution and build socialism in the future, the Chinese government has come up with new motivational slogans. Unfortunately, the sound as if they came from the mid-twentieth century rather than look to the mid-twenty-first.

There are, for instance, the classical Marxist-Leninist-sounding

• "Long live the great unity of all nationalities of China!" and

• "Warmly celebrate the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China!" or

• "Hail the great success of our country's reform and opening-up and socialist modernization!"

Now, "Adhere to the one China policy and promote the country's great cause of peaceful reunification!" is a both a bit awkward and more politically pointed, but it still sounds like the kind of thing one might have seen in the old communist world.

By contrast,

"Adhering to and improving the system of regional autonomy by ethnic minorities, so as to consolidate and develop socialist relations among different ethnic groups based on equality, solidarity, mutual assistance and harmony"

is just a clunker. I've come across this sort of scintillating prose not only in student papers (not surprising, coming from beginning writers) but also in the course of work on both academic and civic committees. It's revealing: a sign that the authors not only are muddled thinkers, but also have no idea of how they are perceived or how to communicate with someone who does not already agree with them.

One further point should be noted, though: What strikes many Americans as so strange about this sort of writing is not so much the ideas as the stock phrases, the elevated or stilted language, and above all, the dire earnestness.

In his classic Orality and Literacy (1982), Walter Ong observed that

"The elements of orally based thought and expression tend to be not so much simple integers as clusters of integers, such as parallel terms or phrases or clauses, antithetical terms or phrases or clauses, epithets . . . .not the soldier, but the brave soldier, not the princess, but the beautiful princess, not the oak, but the sturdy oak."

He believed he could detect the tendency even in modern situations, and speculated:

"The clichés in political denunciations in many low-technology. developing cultures—enemy of the people, capitalist warmongers—that strike high literates as mindless are residual formulary essentials of oral thought processes. One of the many indications of a high, if subsiding, oral residue in the culture of the Soviet Union is (or was a few years ago, when I encountered it) the insistence on speaking there always of 'the Glorious Revolution of October 26'—the epithetic formula here is obligatory stabilization, as were Homeric epithetic formulas 'wise Nestor' or 'clever Odysseus,' or as 'the glorious Fourth of July' used to be in the pockets of oral residue common even in the early twentieth-century United States. The Soviet Union still announces each year the official epithets for various loci classici in Soviet history."

Ong, as we see, attributed the tendency to residues of the past. China certainly enjoys a high-technology culture now, and its economy is growing more rapidly than ours. It will be interesting to see just which weight of tradition is the heavier here—that of orality and pre-modern life—or that of traditional revolutionary rhetoric. The answer may provide another clue as to which way China is going.

Conference on Darwin and Evolution in the Muslim World: Ronald Numbers lecture, "Creationism Goes Global: From American to Islamic Fundamentalism"

2009-10-05T01:52:00.005-04:00

It is always a pleasure to share news of the accomplishments of one’s colleagues and home institution. Elsewhere in these pages, I have cited the innovative work of Salman Hameed, who has undertaken major initiatives in the study of Islamic creationism. In order that far-flung scholars working in this new field might share their insights and develop a common agenda, Salman organized a conference on "Darwin and Evolution in the Muslim World," which brought together speakers from the United States, Canada, Europe, and the Middle East.

In addition to the private sessions among the attendees, the conference included two major public events, a keynote lecture on Friday evening, followed by a panel discussion on Saturday. Herewith, a report on the lecture:

"Creationism Goes Global: From American to Islamic Fundamentalism"

by Ronald L. Numbers (Hilldale Professor of History of Science & Medicine, University of Wisconsin-Madison)

The prompt or point of departure for the lecture was Stephen Jay Gould’s assertion (2000) that, creationism, although strong and growing stronger in the US, was not likely to establish itself elsewhere: . “As insidious as it may seem, at least it's not a worldwide movement,” he said reassuringly. “I hope everyone realizes the extent to which this is a local, indigenous, American bizarrity.” Obviously, even the best scholars don’t always make the best prophets.

Professor Numbers began by noting that both the rise of organized creationism and its connection to Islam began in the 1980s. In order to explain that development, however, he had to review the evolution (no pun intended) of creationist thought itself.

He took the notorious Scopes Trial as a point of entry, saying, quite correctly, that the film and play of “Inherit the Wind”—which is how most of us know the incident—was great drama, but that, as history, it got almost everything wrong.

Contrary to popular opinion, for example, William Jennings Bryan and other opponents of evolution at that time were not simple-minded biblical literalists who thought that the world had been created a mere 6,000 years ago. All believed in the antiquity of the earth: it was the fact, not the date, of creation that was at issue. (They were perfectly content, for example, to take the “days” of the creation account in Genesis as metaphors for eras rather than literal 24-hour periods. (A then-popular variant or alternative form of Old Earth creationism was so-called “gap theory,” which posited a long chronological gap between the events described in the first and second verses of Genesis and thus allowed scholars to harmonize the biblical account with the geological record. The gap theory, as Numbers explained, was even enshrined in Oxford’s Scofield Reference Bible of 1917.) Even pre-human evolution did not necessarily pose an insuperable problem for many American religious conservatives, but the notion of human descent from “lower” species was unacceptable.

By contrast, it was primarily the Seventh Day Adventists who held to the notion of a literal seven-day creation. The crucial change occurred between the 1920s and and 1980s, this once “highly marginalized interpretation of Genesis moved from the margins to the center of evangelical Christianity.” A key step was the founding of the Institution for Creation Research in San Diego in 1972 by Minnesota engineer Henry Morris. As Numbers drily remarked to his sympathetic audience, the term was a horrendous oxymoron because creation is a miracle rather than something that can be substantiated by research. The Institution pursued a two-track agenda, seeking, on the one hand, evidence for the truth of the biblical account of a global flood, and on the other, errors in the scholarship on evolution.

The position of these advocates is often misunderstood, Numbers explained: They don’t defend the miraculous origin of species, and in fact have not done so for 50 years. Rather, the key shift consisted of abandoning acceptance of the antiquity of the earth and instead asserting a young earth, a move that requires them to rely on the Flood as the crucial explanatory mechanism for the destruction and survival of species. The Flood, accordingly, became much more important than the Creation, as such. It was, he said, relishing the irony, an unfortunate problem that the Bible gave the precise dimensions of the Ark, and yet modern scientists kept discovering ever more species. Numbers then detailed some of the contortions that advocates have to perform in order to square this circle: Did the Ark hold all species, or were the “kinds” referred to there perhaps biological orders, etc.? He also mentioned the problem of food and waste: Did the passengers on the Ark perhaps go into some form of hibernation or suspended animation for the duration of the voyage. (Had I been delivering a talk on this subject, I of course could not have restrained myself from quoting Calvin, who marveled that “Noah and his household lived for ten months in a fetid heap of animal droppings, in which he could hardly breathe”—and immediately went on to liken this plight to that of the fetus, which, “shut up in its mother’s womb, lives in filth that would suffocate the strongest man in half an hour.” Calvin had his own particular “issues” regarding confinement and contamination, but that’s another subject.)

Up to this point, there was nothing particularly novel in the talk, at least for specialists—even though Numbers’s skillful explication of both the complexity and shifting emphases in anti-evolutionary thinking was a revelation for the general audience that attended this public lecture rather than the conference, as such. Still, the heightened importance of the Flood was the crucial practical connection between evangelical and Islamic creationism. As the quest for Noah’s Ark took on new importance, teams of explorers went to Turkey, where it had presumably come to rest. In order to obtain the requisite permissions, they had to deal with the Turkish authorities. Then in the 1980s, the Ministry of Education in Istanbul asked the Institute for Creation Research to help produce materials for the schools. In 1992, American representatives took a prominent part in a large creationist conference in Turkey.

In the meantime, however, a major indigenous brand of creationism had arisen in Turkey, marked by the establishment of the Scientific Research Organization (BAV) in 1986. The central figure here and in Numbers’s narrative was the prolific Harun Yahya (pseud. for Adnan Oktar), “the Mary Baker Eddy of Islam.” Already as a student, Yahya is said to have became deeply concerned about the threat of materialism in the sense of both philosophical materialism and modern secular and consumerist culture. Like others before and since, he placed the blame on communism, the Jews (Numbers called him violently antisemitic, though Yahya denies the charge), and Freemasons. Yahya saw his mission as destroying materialism and evolutionary thinking in Turkey. He has since become something of a one-man industry, cranking out such a proliferation of publications (more than 300, at last count; among the best known is The Evolution Deceit) that many accuse him of being but a name behind a consortium of hired pens (though he of course denies it).

Numbers went on to explain some of the distinctive features of this brand of thinking, noting that the growing alliance between evangelical and Islamic creationism was in many ways rather strange. For example, because Islam is not bound by the evangelical Christian concern with the young earth and recent appearance of species, Yahya has no trouble embracing the Big Bang or radiocarbon dating. Still, for both, human evolution is anathema.

The rise of Intelligent Design as the new incarnation of creationism—the Discovery Institute was founded in 1990—should in theory have strengthened the alliance, but for the fact that the US side did not want one. Later, after one of Yahya’s associates collaborated with the Discovery Institute, Yahya, motivated by envy, turned violently against Intelligent Design, as such.

Numbers, who has both met and intensively studied Yahya, clearly relished the opportunity to relate some of the latter’s quirks and travails, including several arrests on charges ranging from cocaine possession to corruption and irregular sexual activities. At one point, he explained with evident restraint, Yahya was incarcerated and diagnosed as a “paranoid schiophrenic”—though later, a higher body adjusted that to ‘passionate idealist.’”

Numbers closed the lecture by noting that there were alarming signs on several fronts. An ultra-orthodox Jewish creationism has arisen. More ominously, belief in evolution is slipping in places other than the United States. Even some 20 percent of Europeans espouse creationist views. And what of Darwin’s birthplace, England, in this, his bicentennial year? A majority of Britons now reject evolution. Numbers concluded, “So much for celebrating Darwin.”

Video of the public proceedings will be available at the conference website.

Amherst 250th Parade: Kudos, and a few ironies and embarrassments

2009-10-02T02:07:00.014-04:00

From the Amherst Bulletin:

An anniversary 250 years in the making: Amherst celebrates founding with huge parade
By BOB FLAHERTY
Staff Writer
Published on October 02, 2009

Rain or shine, came the words of organizers at 9 a.m. Sunday. The shine part never showed. But the Amherst populace did, throngs of 'em. The rain was coming down pretty steadily at 10, 11, 12, and was still going at 1:17 p.m. when Amherst's 250th Anniversary Parade stepped off from Amherst College. The parade didn't finish up until after 3 at the University of Massachusetts. (read the rest)

The weather was almost a more prominent feature of most coverage and chatter than was the parade itself, especially because the preceding day had been unusually beautiful and sunny. Still, the parade held the attention of viewers and reporters. HIghlights in some accounts: Parade marshals the venerable Steve Puffer (noted repository of North Amherst historical memory) and Stan Ziomek (longtime town official and patron saint of baseball and other youth sports) tossing Tootsie Rolls to the crowds (someday, anthropologists and historians will analyze each of these choices and actions in microscopic detail, you know), the ever-popular UMass Marching Band, members of South Church belting out the "Battle Hymn of the Republic," the "Zamboni" (or was it? at the University of Wisconsin—another land grant university, historically related to UMass, and with a far better hockey team—there was never any doubt that we had a real, certified Zamboni, and not a knockoff) from the UMass rink, and the re-enactors of the 9th Masschusetts Artillery firing off a few rounds with real black powder.

Of course, in other of my circles, the favorites were the Emily Dickinson Museum—participants in the new ballet, "Emily of Amherst," dispensing cookies— and the float of the service organization, the Amherst Club, proclaiming that it had raised over a quarter of a million dollars for local charitable causes.

Hampshire College was ably represented in minimalist fashion by President Ralph Hexter and his partner, Manfred Kollmeier, along with former President Chuck Longsworth (a few others participated, notably some of our Library and IT staff, as individuals rather than part of the official lead team). Of course, in civic affairs no less than cuisine, minimalism may prove elegant but ultimately unsatisfying, leaving us hungering for more.

Indeed, the low profile of my employer in these activities was regrettable, as is the modest level of its involvement in the civic affairs of the town as a whole—which is ironic, given that one of our founding documents, The Making of a College (1975) identified one of its four key "challenges" as the need "To reorient the college in relation to community, so that it and associated institutions will play a vigorous, constructive part in shaping community development." and devoted an entire chapter to Interinstitutional Cooperation and the Larger Community. The founders of the College realized that the institutions of higher learning were changing the character of the town— the State College became the University in 1947, and since 1950, both population and population density have more than tripled—and had to bear some responsibility for helping Amherst adjust to those changes. Such was the theory, at any rate.

Participation in a boosterish parade of this sort is no litmus test, but we need to do more. To be sure, our previous Dean of the Faculty, Aaron Berman, speaking on the steps of Town Hall when we kicked off the 250th celebrations in February, astutely called attention to the extent to which our students have found ways to unite their talents and curiosities with the needs of the town, for example, through service in the educational system. To be sure, our colleague Myrna Breitbart has worked tirelessly to make more robust the community service requirement for students (new policies are about to go into effect). Nonetheless, even our admirable community-based learning program has focused more on traumatized urban areas such as Holyoke than our own surroundings. Community efforts of the College as a whole (even taking into account its meager resources, compared with those of Amherst College) are as modest as our parade presence.

What disappoints but does not surprise me is that our students don't really feel connected to the town. It's not their fault, and rather, it's ours and the norm: Students are transients, and almost all Hampshire College students live on campus, which is located at the far southern end of town, and not, like Amherst and UMass, at or within walking distance of the center. After all, why should they feel connected when their own institution evidently does not?

Our absence on the list of "major sponsors"—next to the names of the University of Massachusetts and Amherst College—is glaring. In fact, we could not even pony up to fund one of the blue-and-gold banners (above) that adorn the lampposts of the town. Frankly, it's an embarrassment. I mean, if the tiny Amherst Brewing Company, which is only half as old as the College, can be a "major sponsor," and if the purchasers of banners include (in addition to the Chamber of Commerce, Rotary Club, History Museum, and Emily Dickinson Museum, as one would expect) local businesses whose domains range from liquor and insurance to plumbing and small-engine repair, what sort of message are we sending?

Well, apparently, none at all. In one of my courses, my co-teacher and I are devoting some time to local history. Had we not mentioned the 250th anniversary, our students would have been completely unaware of it. A sad observation on a happy occasion. (I hope to follow up with some postings on student reactions to their encounters with Amherst history.)

Additional highlights:

• Best slogan (fine points of grammar or usage aside): Valley Light Opera

"'Fifty percent less calories than those other operas!' cried a member of Valley Light Opera, whose collegues were in dress rehearsal for 'The Mikado'."

• Irony of the day: the invitation to and fascination with the Budweiser Clydesdales—this, in a town that prides itself on its defiantly anti-corporate attitude. Additional irony: The mighty equines could not "march" in the end because the rain would have damaged their elaborate gear, and so, they passed by in their trailer. Sort of like the difference between a Budweiser and a real beer, too. Speaking of real beer, Amherst Brewing Company not only stepped up and became a major sponsor of the 250th, but also produced a special brew for the occasion. There's a big whopping metaphor for something lurking in all these ironies.

I'm not sure just what about the gear of the horses was so precious. Didn't these creatures, appropriately harnessed, use to do real work in real weather? Fortunately, the horses pulling the Muddy Brook Farm Wagon, bearing Parade Marshals Barry Roberts and Stan Ziomek, were made of sterner stuff. So, too, were (as one would hope), the Quaboag Highlanders, with all fifteen pipers piping.

• Second place for irony:

-Those "Congos" singing Julia Ward Howe's stirring "Battle Hymn of the Republic" were a big hit. But isn't that a religious activity? I mean: a church congregation singing verses that are a veritable summary of Christology? (And weren't our squeamish residents concerned about the "militaristic" imagery? After all, as their bumper stickers like to proclaim, "War is Not the Answer"? Well, actually it was, in 1861.) Public money paid for this parade and would thus seem to be endorsing its content.

-Flash back to Spring 2008: Amherst Town Meeting appropriates (Article 35) $ 25,000 to support the 250th Anniversary celebration in which this religious act took place.

-Flash forward to Spring 2009: Town Meeting votes down a proposal (the lone historic preservation proposal defeated amidst a string of unprecedented victories) for $ 7,000 to repair the roof of the historic 1820s North Congregational Church on the grounds that this constituted an unconscionable violation of separation of church and state.

In point of fact, there is nothing wrong with using public money to pay for a parade in which a church choir sings—any more than in using that money to protect the public interest in a historic resource that has public value and just happens to belong to a religious organization.

You're 250 years old, Amherst: surely, it's time to grow up.

We note the ironies and disappointments because we have to (to do otherwise would be untrue to Amherst's critical spirit), but the event was, on balance, of course, a great success. As the Bulletin observed:

As a capstone on the year's celebration, the parade was a perfect moment in time to reflect on how far the town has come since its colonial period: where schools were once an afterthought, two colleges, a public university and a widely respected public school system now stand; where Native Americans were once persecuted, an accepting and diverse community thrives; and where a colonial territory once defaulted to an overseas king, one of the most democratic forms of government - Amherst's representative Town Meeting - holds sway.

So much has happened in the last 250 years, in the town, the nation and the world. One thing that has remained consistent is the care Amherst residents show for one another, as well as their sense of stewardship of the planet and the community they call home. (read the rest)

1 October: 60th Anniversary of the Chinese Revolution

2009-10-02T00:21:00.006-04:00

Well, at least someone still knows how to arrange a good military parade (though what Mao or Lenin would make of red miniskirts and white boots is an interesting topic for speculation).

The 60th anniversary of the Chinese Revolution has attracted modest comment here in the "West," which is too bad in some ways and a welcome sign in others. Some of us can still remember when the People's Republic was "Red China" and inspired almost paranoid fear in Americans. And even just three decades ago, the arrival of scholars and students from the People's Republic at American universities was a tremendous novelty.

What is perhaps most intriguing is that so little of the commentary has had to do with the overall history of the revolution and socialism. These news stories are generally not the place to go if one is seeking a broad overview of Chinese history in the past six decades. Communism seems to come into play almost exclusively with regard to the disastrous Cultural Revolution (obligatory but briefest of references, of course) or recent reforms. And, although almost every report duly cites some statistics about the recent consumer revolution (world's largest auto market, highest numbers of internet and cell phone users; okay, so they can't get access to significant portions of that internet) almost none talks seriously or substantively about the greater and earlier transformation, from agrarian semi-"feudal" regime to modern industrial state. (BBC at least offered some statistics that spanned most of the regime's history)

Much of the commentary has, understandably, focused on the contemporary question of where China stands between its former or nominal socialism and its current engagement in the international economy as crucial producer and consumer alike. It is telling that the market in Mao memorabilia—the free market, that is—took off only in the 1990s, i.e. precisely when the nation most clearly began to distance itself from his legacy. As one California retailer explained: “There are not a lot of Chinese people, especially people over 40, who are interested in this stuff,” said Ms. Edison, whose parents and grandparents survived the Cultural Revolution. “For them, it is a sore reminder of two lost generations.”

Almost needless to say, the now megalomaniacally renamed "History" (formerly: History Channel) had no time to truck in such trivialities, being preoccupied with the need to pump out more pap about "Pawn Stars" and gangs (and the connection to history would be . . . what?). On the other hand, who can blame these people? After all, why bother with the formerly urgent debate about socialist utopia vs. dystopia when you can talk about other fantasy lands such as Atlantis?

* * *

A selection of commentary:

• Associated Press (via NPR): "Communist China marks 60 years with tanks, kitsch"
• BBC, "China's lucky generation" (on people born after the Cultural Revolution)

• BBC, "Communist China Marks 60th Year"
• Spiegel: "Marching in Lockstep into the Future: China Celebrates 60th Anniversary of Communist Rule" (concludes that the military parade and slogans are throwback and, if not entirely a sign of regression, "the characteristics on show on Thursday were not particularly attractive")

Local Historic District Study Committee: Research Begins

2009-09-26T15:26:00.010-04:00

The Amherst Local Historic District Study Committee convened again on 8 September for a walking tour of the existing Dickinson National Historic Register District, which is the putative core area of the proposed local historic district.

Here, Committee members standing between the two Hills Mansions: the Leonard Hills House (now the Amherst Woman's Club; 35 Triangle Street), to the right, and the house of his son, the Henry F. Hills House (former Amherst Boys and Girls Club; 360 Main Street) on the left. Committee Chair Jerry Guidera (foreground), current owner of the Henry Hills House, points out the view from the two mansions across Main Street. At one time, Messrs. Hills, father and son, could look down (literally and figuratively) on their factories and workers below, with a view of the Holyoke Range in the background. In the mid-ground today: the Colonial Revival Baxter Marsh house (c. 1896-97), former home of the Amherst Record. Robert Frost had also lived there for a time. Formerly located at 109 Main Street, the house was moved to its current location at 401 Main St. to make room for the new Police Station in 1989. The current owner is architect Bill Gillen, another member of the Committee.

Now that the Committee has selected the existing Dickinson National Historic Register District as the point of departure for its work, the next step will be to determine what additional properties would be appropriate for inclusion in a local historic district. The practical task is thus to compile an inventory of historic resources in adjoining areas, which will move to the top of our agenda in October.

Preparation for the 250th Anniversary Parade

2009-09-26T15:05:00.005-04:00

Bunting goes up on the 1889 Town Hall early Tuesday morning (22 September),

in preparation for Sunday's 250th Anniversary Parade.

Labor Day . . . and who was talking about the labor movement?

2009-09-08T23:29:00.005-04:00

In part because I have just been reading Andrei Markovits's hard-hitting but judicious Uncouth Nation: Why Europe Dislikes America, I am appropriately wary of making invidious comparisons between the continent and our compatriots, and yet the temptation remains.

Namely, I have been struck by the fact that, on Labor Day, we here do so little to commemorate labor and the labor movement—an omission all the more glaring and serious given that the public is so ignorant of this history. In an age of deindustrialization, when union membership has declined and supposedly serious commentators are allowed to characterize even the most timid public health care proposals as "socialism," perhaps it should be not surprising that many people dismiss unions and labor movements in general as yet another "special interest."

To be sure, we find the inevitable newspaper articles and television programs about the "state of the economy" and the like, but these treat labor only in passing and never deal with history in any serious way. And what did History (formerly: History Channel) offer us: not even a shallow or sentimentalized treatment, and instead sensationalism and superstition: "Gangland," "Manson," Nostradamus and Edgar Cayce. Of course, what can one expect of an organization that now considers "Ice Road Truckers" and pawnshop owners to be denizens of Clio's domain? But PBS was little better: "Antiques Roadshow" and "Wild Rivers." More serious, but not much better.

Ignorance may be an excuse, and it's the easiest one in the world because even those allegedly arch-liberal and leftist mainstream media are doing nothing to correct it.

Would it help to have a program or two about immigrant sweatshop workers? the history of the AFL-CIO? the Wobblies, or just the history of the holiday and the story of why Americans dedicate a day to labor in September, whereas most other developed countries do so on May 1? It couldn't hurt. Regardless of where they, as individuals, stand politically, Americans as a whole might just benefit from learning about the conflicts and accomplishments of the past. And then, rather than engaging in food fights about "socialism," they might talk in a more civil and nuanced way about the issues confronting us in the present and the future.

1 September 1939: Seventy Years Ago, World War II Broke Out

2009-09-01T23:57:00.007-04:00

One doesn't wish to be too harsh, but one can't help feeling a certain sense of parochialism here. The Seventieth anniversary of the outbreak of World War II does not seem to be generating the sort of coverage I would have expected or hoped for in the US. To be sure, there was the occasional piece, but the date is just not part of our collective consciousness in the way that it is part of the European one. By and large, we tend to think of the War as beginning when it began for us in 1941. Let us see what 2011 brings.

From among the various publications and postings, let me call attention to this one by Barry Rubin, who takes time out from his endless commentary on the Middle East to turn to the European past. Writing on the anniversary of the Nazi-Soviet non-aggression pact, he reminds us that World II began not only with a German attack on Poland from the west, but also with a Soviet attack from the east, supposedly in order to ensure order. (I wonder how many of my students know that—before I tell them, of course).

Rubin's aim is both to correct the popular historical view and to argue that the Russians are continuing a historically aggressive policy under a new government and a new guise:

Stalin says that the Germans desire peace and he offers a toast: “I know how much the German nation loves its Fuhrer; I should therefore like to drink to his health.” As the German foreign minister leaves, Stalin has some words of special importance for him: “The Soviet government takes the new pact very seriously. I guarantee on my word of honor that the Soviet Union would not betray its partner.” It was one of the few promises Stalin didn’t break. It was one of the many promises that Hitler did.

Today, 70 years later, the Russian government is trying to justify this terrible deed. Says military analyst Pavel Felgenhauer, "This is not about history at all."

In effect, the Russian government is asserting its sphere of influence over all these and other independent states. The implications are frightening, most directly for Poles, Latvians, Lithuanians, Estonians, and others in Central Europe but also for Georgia and Azerbaijan, and for anyone who treasures liberty.

Russia has been putting increasing pressure on its neighbors, sometimes using its energy exports for blackmail, sometimes using money or covert operations. One remembers what the American diplomatist George F. Kennan wrote at the onset of the Cold War: To be Russia's neighbor means either to submit or to be considered an enemy.

The basic Russian historical claim about 1939 is that by itself seizing these territories, the USSR prevented Germany from using them as a staging ground for an attack. In addition, efforts to work out a security alliance with Britain and France had failed.

This is profoundly misleading. The Soviets genuinely saw Nazi Germany as an ally. They helped the German army train, they sold it materials to build up its military, and even up to the moment the Germans attacked in 1941, Stalin insisted that Hitler would not betray him. Indeed, he ordered punishment for any Soviet agents who sent warnings of an imminent attack.

It may be even more complicated. The New York Times reports, "Russian Premier Calls Nazi-Soviet Pact Immoral." But Mr. Putin did so mainly by saying that other countries were just as bad: blaming the British and French for their earlier appeasement, and Poland for profiting from it:

The prime minister released his historical interpretation just before a scheduled visit to Poland on Tuesday for a commemoration of the start of World War II, 70 years ago this week.

The pact — which was followed by German and Soviet invasions of Poland — remains a source of anger there, and the article heightened expectations of what Mr. Putin would say during his visit.

Ria Novosti, an official Russian news agency, reported that Mr. Putin would use the trip to counter what the Russians call efforts by Eastern Europeans to recast the causes and lessons of World War II. Russia looks upon the war as a searing event in its history, one in which, by some estimates, 25 million Soviet citizens died.
. . . .
In his article, Mr. Putin wrote that he was compelled to discuss the pact, named Molotov-Ribbentrop for the Soviet and Nazi foreign ministers who negotiated the accord, because it was being cited today by countries who have traced their postwar Soviet occupation to this agreement.

“It is indicative that history is often slanted by those who actually apply double standards in modern politics,” he wrote.

The article, published in the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza and posted in Russian on the Russian government Web site, did not backtrack on earlier Russian condemnations of the pact or apologies for the subsequent massacre of Polish officers at Katyn Forest.

But it did highlight a theme that has played on Russian state television in recent weeks: that even Poland was complicit in making deals with the Nazis. The article notes that the Polish Army occupied two provinces of Czechoslovakia at the same time the German Army invaded that country following the Munich agreement with France and Britain in 1938.

Mr. Putin argues that the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was inevitable after the Western Allies had acceded to the invasion of Czechoslovakia.

He called that an effort by the West to “ ‘buy off’ Hitler and redirect his aggression to the east.”

Stalin’s government, Mr. Putin wrote, was impelled to sign the agreement because it was facing aggression in the east from Japan and did not want war on two fronts.

Mr. Putin did not mention that the Nazi-Soviet pact also restored a portion of the Russian empire lost after World War I and coveted by Stalin. (read the rest)

An interesting spectacle: military maneuvering, betrayals, opportunism, and aggression then, and their political equivalents today. Welcome to my world. In East Central Europe, nothing historical is forgotten (though it is often deliberately suppressed), everything has public symbolism or a hidden meaning (lying silent but threatening like a land mine). History there is never really dead; it just keeps resurfacing in new ways.