Can Sophie of the Unsellables Save the World?

Sophie Allsop, Host of the Unsellables

Yesterday was weird because I wanted very much to stay on task and be productive but it was really hard. Every little thing took tremendous effort. 

I suspect this struggle is due to situational depression, caused by the behavior of people who continue to contest the election, the bungled vaccine roll-out, and the general awfulness of life right now. It didn't help that my long-awaited dental appointment was canceled because two people in the office tested positive for COVID.

I had hoped that there would be more people vaccinated by now, and that we'd be progressing towards our new normal, whatever that might be. Instead we're in the middle of a cluster-fuck with more transmissible variants of the virus emerging. Thank you, Donald Trump.

But anger and grief don't actually serve us well in a crisis, do they? On TV, emotions motivate the hero to take decisive and successful action. In real life, emotional turmoil just seems to cause decision paralysis or bad choices. 

Hoarding: Buried Alive disappeared from Prime Video for a few days, and in the time that it was missing, I started watching The Unsellables on YouTube. My husband hates reality TV but I like it – there's a predictable structure which always has a positive outcome (at least in the shows I watch). Sophie the real estate expert looks at the outside of the unsold house, says, "The problem must be inside, and I'm going to find out what it is." She walks through the house and comes up with solutions, which her team then implements, and hey, the house is either sold or they expect it will sell soon. Everyone's happy.

The other thing I love about that show right now is that everybody appears to be doing normal things in a normal economy. Nobody is unemployed, nobody is sick, nobody is wearing masks. It's life the way it used to be, a happy little glimpse of the past where families work together to make change happen and success is possible.

Wouldn't it be great if we had a Pandemic Sophie to guide us to a happier ending? I don't think Joe Biden and his team will be able to function as our guides, not because they are incompetent, but because they will face fierce opposition from people who don't understand science or the necessity of working together to save lives. It's Proud Boys and conspiracy theorists and short-sighted Republicans who stand in the way of the next administration, not peeling wallpaper or purple paint on the walls.

Ecclesiastes 2:26 says that God has given wisdom and knowledge and joy to people who are good in His sight. Right now, we desperately need all three, and perseverance to get us through the next few months.

Books: Words, words, mere words?

Words, words, mere words, no matter from the heart.
~ William Shakespeare, Troilus and Cressida. Act V, scene iii

Whether spoken or printed, words are ultimately, only representations, not the things themselves; or words are symbols - representations of ideas and subject to definition, interpretation, redefinition, and misinterpretation.  Yet they are the primary means by which we communicate our thoughts and experiences, and how we express our deepest values and beliefs.  Hence the two questions raised at the end of my last post:

What is the best way to deal with a discarded book?  For sacred texts, the question is even more complicated:  How do we dispose of this sacred text while respecting its content and traditions? (Beside Strange Waters, Mar. 8, 2012)

This is obviously a problem for many people and institutions.  A Google search for "how to get rid of books" will yield "about 139,000,000 results," including:

"How to Get Rid of Old Books" at WikiHow
"New Ways to Do It Make Giving Away Books a Bit Less Painful" (New York Times 2007)

and

"Breaking the Sentimental Attachment to Books" from becomingminimalist.com

One thing these websites have in common is the idea that books should be shared, sold, or given away; as a last resort, damaged books should be recycled.  Nobody advocates the burning of books.

For an excellent overview of the negative connotations of book burning, see the Wikipedia article on "Book burning."

Book burning, in general, is bad!

The last good-bye (a respectful farewell to secular books as well as the Bible and the Quran)

These two questions haunt university libraries, famous writers and bibliophiles of all ages:

What do you do with too many books?

What do you do with a book that has become too damaged to use?

One abstract writer summed up the problem beautifully:

There is an inherent tension in most literate cultures between the idea of a book or enduring text on the one hand and the possibility of its disposal or destruction on the other. Disposing of books transgresses inhibitions reinforced by family, school, media, and government. The concern for book preservation involves respect for culture(s), veneration of traditions, and, at its root, the preservation of cultural values (Abstract: "Disposing of Non-Disposable Texts").

Even if we are disposing of a secular text, one without the weight of history and sacred tradition, educated and intelligent people find it difficult to destroy books.  Ray Bradbury's anti-Utopian novel Farenheit 451 is set in a future uncannily like our present, where people are literate, but read only non-fiction; choose shallow, interactive entertainment over reading; have lost connection and empathy; and whose government routinely burns books and kills thinkers.  We instinctively know that, when we lose books, we lose ourselves.

Nevertheless, at some point, even the most beloved books will become too damaged to repair or keep, and then we must face the hard question:  What is the best way to deal with a discarded book?  For sacred texts, the question is even more complicated:  How do we dispose of this sacred text while respecting its content and traditions?

Quotes from Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 (just because I love books)

Works Cited

"Abstract: Disposing OfNon-Disposable Texts." Syracuse University Library. Web. 8 Mar. 2012. <http://surface.syr.edu/rel/32/>.
Citation for actual book (not the abstract above): James W. Watts, “Disposing of Non-Disposable Texts,” in The Death of Sacred Texts: Ritual Disposal and Renovation of Texts in the World Religions, ed. Kristina Myrvold. Farnham: Ashgate, 2010, pp. 147-59.

How should one show respect for the Quran?

To comprehend the outrage expressed by so many Muslims when the Quran is burned, we must first understand how Muslims see the Quran (or Koran).  First and foremost, it is sacred and therefore must be treated with respect:

The Qur'an is treated with immense respect by Muslims because it is the sacred word of God.

While the Qur'an is recited aloud, Muslims should behave with reverence and refrain from speaking, eating or drinking, or making distracting noise (BBC Religions, Islam: The Quran).

Not only must the Quran be respected when it is read or recited, there is a protocol for handling the book itself.

• To touch the Quran while in an impure state shows disrespect for this holy book. Showing respect would include bathing before reading, washing one's hands, or (if a woman is menstruating or a person is ritually unclean) wearing gloves or not touching the Quran at all.
• "Not having sexual relation in an area where the Quran is. If this must happen then one should cover the Quran. (Remember, this is a book which is a miracle, filled with light and spirituality) and Allah’s sacred and greatest words which were sent by the pure angels to the blessed Prophet (SA)."
• "Out of great love and respect, one should not put other books upon it."
• "One should not turn the pages of the Quran with saliva on his fingers" (Tafseer Ruhal Ma’ani vol.14 pg.155).

According to some scholars, non-Muslims should not even be permitted to touch a Quran written or printed in Arabic; rather, non-Muslims should be given a translation to help them in their search for understanding:

"It is not permitted for a non-Muslim to touch the Mus-haf (the Arabic text of the Quran) and he should not be allowed to do so even with the purpose of reading it in order to embrace Islam" (Giving Quran to non-Muslim, Islamweb).

In addition to being handled with respect, a Quran must also be stored respectfully.

Muslims never place the Qur'an on the floor, and many try to ensure it is kept higher than other books (E.g. on the top shelf of a bookcase). This would especially be the case with a copy of the Qur'an written in Arabic (The Qur'an: Key facts).

In the UK, libraries have responded to Muslim complaints by re-shelving the Quran and other books on the highest shelves:

Librarians are being told to move the Bible to the top shelf to avoid giving offence to followers of Islam.
Muslims have complained of finding the Koran on lower shelves, saying it should be put above commonplace things (Daily Mail).

Other sacred texts, such as the Bible, are also accorded great respect by Muslims.

Jesus Christ and mother Mary are considered holy and highly revered by every Muslim.... [Islam]  is a universal faith stemming from the same origins of the Judeo-Christian faith which along with Islam are recognized as Abrahamic religions. so, burning the Quran would be like consequently throwing the Bible and Torah in the same bonfire.

This is mainly why Muslims cannot retaliate against burning al Quran by burning any copy of the Bible because Islam decrees that Muslims should respect and honor the Bible and Torah as well (Dr. Ashraf Ezzat).

To summarize:  while many Americans tend to treat books as commonplace objects and have little or no understanding of the sacred, Muslims view the Quran, the Torah and the Bible as holy texts which must be treated with the utmost respect.  While these books are in usable condition, they are revered.  It is only logical that, when the texts are no longer usable, they are disposed of in a reverent and respectful manner and absolutely never burned with trash at the dump.

Quran burning and the U.S. military - a tableau of crimes & misfortunes?

Indeed, history is nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortunes - Voltaire.

“What experience and history teach is this - that nations and governments have never learned anything from history, or acted upon any lessons they might have drawn from it" - Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

The latest "deeply unfortunate incident" in Afghanistan is the burning of Korans, or Qurans, at an American air base.  The ensuing violence has left an astonishing number of people dead or wounded.

Dead and wounded (an incomplete list):

7 dead, dozens wounded (2/22/2012)
2 American advisors dead (2/25/2012)
2 Afghans dead, 7 international troops wounded (2/26/2012)
9 die in suicide "revenge" bombing of Jalalabad Airport (2/27/2012)

This violent response has, I think, mystified the average American.  Why are Muslims so angry over the burning of books?  And, perhaps more importantly, how should we as a nation and individuals, respond to their anger?

Over the next few days, I will attempt to answer these questions.

Doing justice - to the text and to real human beings

Note:  I wrote this before the recent Koran-burning incident, and I want to preface this by saying that I don't want to offend anybody.  However, the incident recounted below has bothered me for several years, and I think the underlying principle is even more pertinent now.  TRUE JUSTICE DOES NOT PUNISH ONE INDIVIDUAL FOR ANOTHER PERSON'S CRIMES, whether that "justice" is  killing American officers or raping a Pakistani woman as retribution for acts they personally did not commit.

If you are offended by my words, I hope you respond with words and not violence!

---

On a practical level, if we spend too much time dealing with dissonance and ambivalence, we are paralyzed by doubt and indecision, and become less effective and less efficient.  It is possible to think too much.

Thus it's not an entirely bad thing to ignore or reject a statement that sounds too weird, wacky or just plain dumb.  It's hard get through our busy days without dissecting every advertisement, news sound byte,  op-ed article, and friends' conversations. 

Nevertheless, intellectual rigor, accurate textual interpretation and good critical thinking skills are especially important in the areas of religion and morality, because people are willing to lay down their lives, or to kill, for their religious beliefs.  Less dramatically, our beliefs influence our legal systems and corporate behavior; determine social norms; and guide or control our economic structures.  If we "get it wrong," there are long-lasting consequences for society and for the individual.

For instance, consider the debate over women's rights in the Muslim world.  In 2002, a Pakistan woman known as Mukhtar Mai or Mukhtar Bibi was gang-raped as punishment for her 12-year-old brother's alleged misconduct.  Village elders not only sanctioned this rape; they ordered it.  Mukhtar Bibi risked her life by reporting the rape and attempting to bring her attackers to justice, yet by 2011, Pakistan's Supreme Court had released all but one of the rapists.

Other, more moderate Muslims condemn the actions of the village elders and the rapists.  They do not believe that a woman should be raped, beaten, or imprisoned as the result of another person's actions, and that women have some, or even equal, rights.  Same religious texts, but different interpretations.

Similarly, in Christianity, there are horrific episodes throughout history, from the Crusades and the Inquisition to the Salem witch trials and beyond.  Millions have suffered as a result of religious texts interpreted in a manner generally be considered false today.

How can we prevent these injustices?  Only by humbly interrogating the text and questioning interpretations while extending grace to those around us.

(Journal, January 2012)

---

I read the Bible often
I try to read it right
As far as I can understand
It's nothing but a burning light ("Soul of a Man" as recorded by Bruce Cockburn)

Mercy, detached from Justice, grows unmerciful.-- C.S. Lewis

I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice. --Abraham Lincoln

Love is the only force capable of transforming an enemy into friend. --Martin Luther King Jr.

---

• True Survivor from Newsweek
• PAKISTAN: Interview with Mukhtar Bibi, gang-rape victim denied right to travel
• Pakistan Frees All But 1 Accused In Gang Rape

• Muslim Americans Pledge Support for Rape Survivor Mukhtar Mai
•  Articulating An American Voice Of Islam And Justice by Muslims For Mukhtaran

Why question everything?

Why not?

Okay, seriously - why should we question everything?

If you believe whatever people tell you (or if you believe what you read in your email inbox), you will believe many foolish things and, as an unfortunate result, you may make decisions based on lies which might ruin your health or cause you to lose money.  For instance, astonishingly, not only have people fallen for the famed "Nigerian scam," it has a long and successful history predating the advent of email, and it is rumored that some people have even died in pathetic attempts to recover their savings.

• Snopes debunks the Nigerian Scam
• Annals of Crime - The Perfect Mark:  How a Massachesetts psychotherapist fell for a Nigerian e-mail
• The Nigerian Scam on the Crimes of Persuasion website

(Note: I cannot find a reference to the supposed murder of an American in Nigeria in June of 1995 on any reputable news web site, nor can I find the actual name of the individual supposedly murdered.  So, have people actually died?  I don't really know.)

On a more spiritual plane, history is littered with sad examples of people who blindly trusted charismatic leaders.    In my lifetime alone, I can remember the 1978 Jonestown massacre in Guyana.  In the 1990s, national news reported that dozens died in the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, TX.  More recently, polygamist sects and child brides were the scandal of the Southwest. 

For me, these real-life tragedies raise two questions:  "Who you gonna listen to?" and more importantly, "Why should you believe them?"

Should the government tell you what kind of light bulb to buy?

I just read this quote from a letter by Dianne Schram, and for a moment, I too felt enraged about my supposed loss of freedoms.  Then I started to think.

“Our freedoms of choice are slowly disappearing. The government is telling us what light bulbs to use, what kind of cars to drive, what to eat and what kind of health care is required.”

On the surface, it does sound as if our freedoms are being eroded.  However, ignore the emotional appeal and consider the facts.

Is the government telling me what kind of light bulbs to buy?  No.  The government is telling manufacturers what kind of light bulb to create, in an attempt to increase energy efficiency while reducing overall electricity usage, air pollution, and cooling costs.  Ultimately, the change should reduce your monthly electric bill as well as reducing the cost of doing business.   When I spend less per month on electricity, I can spend more on things I want or need.  And that additional spending will help the American economy just a little bit, and that extra spending might create or protect more American jobs.  Not a bad trade-off for a silly incandescent light bulb I never really liked anyway.

Consumer Benefits of Energy Star Certified Light Bulbs

More on LED's:
"The Advantages & Benefits of LED Lighting" from National Geographic
"Green Promise Seen in Switch to LED Lighting" from the New York Times (love the part about saving money in Buckingham Palace!)

So, if America can really "save enough energy to light 3 million homes for a year, save about $600 million in annual energy costs, and prevent 9 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per year, equivalent to those from about 800,000 cars" (www.energystar.gov), why not switch to LED or fluorescent lighting? Why make such a fuss over a light bulb?

Well, maybe Schram has a point about automobiles.  After all, buying a car is a more significant choice that can affect my spending and happiness for years to come.  However, the government is not dictating my choice of vehicle, merely setting standards for energy efficiency and safety.   Who wants or needs an unsafe car?  Should Americans be forced to buy inefficient gas-guzzlers?  We're already hearing about "agony at the pump."  What would consumer choice be like now when gas prices are high, if car-makers weren't held to high fuel-efficiency standards.

A wide range of new and used vehicles appears to be readily available.  I can still buy a V-8 truck, SUV, full-sized sedan or high-performance sports car if I want one.  It's difficult to imagine what kind of car Ms. Schram requires, that the government will no longer allow her to purchase.

Unbeknownst to Ms. Schram, the real danger in the future is a lack of affordable energy, not lack of consumer choice.  This article does an excellent job of detailing the effect of rising gas prices on the U.S. economy in the year to come:

Can America adjust to higher gas prices?  (Brad Plumer, Washington Post)

Moving on to Schram's third point, I feel most keenly the pain of her last complaint:  increasing government control of food.  In 2008, I watched in horror as New York City has moved to eliminate trans fat from restaurant menus, imagining a future in which truly self-indulgent meals could only be painfully reconstructed at home.  Yet there are genuine reasons for governmental and individual concern over the American obesity epidemic:

Health Effects of Obesity (Stanford Hospital and Clinics)
Impact Of Childhood Obesity Goes Beyond Health

Overeating without exercising is literally crippling and killing us!  No wonder Michelle Obama was motivated to combat childhood obesity with her "Let's Move" campaign.  Helping the next generation to live better is a worthy cause.

Perhaps Ms. Schram sees incandescent light bulbs, big sedans and fatty food as an expression of freedom; I don't.  Ultimately, we're talking about preferences here, and preferring what destroys the planet and your own health is ultimately not freedom, but stupidity.  If every one of us 7 billion people on this planet exercise our preferences, the result will be chaos and destruction.  The reality is that all of us must limit our freedoms in order to survive.

Maybe we need to focus on our long-range goals like renewable energy and resources, energy independence, and national security.  Maybe it's more important to focus on clean air than the light bulb in my desk lamp; more important to conserve petroleum than drive an SUV; better to live longer and live well than to eat yet another carton of fries from the drive-through.

Photo from http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.com/2011/08/do-property-rights-increase-freedom.html