Blog


About


Books

 Latest Post: Flash!

Agnostic
A Spirited Manifesto
Available April 4, 2016

   Who is the AT?   Books by LH
  • Agnostic

  • The First Muslim

  • After The Prophet

  • Jezebel

  • Mary

  • More from LH

     

Hajj Distress

Posted October 23rd, 2013 by Lesley Hazleton

I am distressed by this news report in today’s Detroit Free Press.  The first four paragraphs:

A group of metro Detroiters visiting Saudi Arabia for the annual Muslim pilgrimage said they were attacked and threatened with death last week by a group of Sunni men from Australia because they are Shias, a minority sect within Islam.

One of the members of the group was strangled until his face turned blue and women in the group were threatened with rape, according to people who witnessed the attack last week. They allege that authorities in Saudi Arabia did not take their complaints seriously and deleted a video one of them had made of the incident.

A U.S. State Department official told the Free Press on Monday: “We are concerned by reports that a group of U.S. citizens was attacked … at a campsite for Hajj pilgrims located outside of Mecca. We take these reports seriously and are committed to the protection of U.S. citizens traveling and residing abroad.”

The Embassy of Saudi Arabia did not return a reporter’s calls or an e-mail seeking comment. The State Department official said the hajj and interior ministries in Saudi Arabia “have confirmed that they are investigating” the incident.

In this instance, my distress is more than a matter of principle.  I have been a guest of Imam Qazwini and the Islamic Center of America (the largest mosque in North America), and admire their openness, their warmth, their calm devotion, and their civic involvement.  I have made dear friends there, people with whom I can talk deeply across all so-called divides of religion/affiliation/belief.

And this distress is only further deepened by the language used in the Detroit Free Press article:  the “say they were” in the headline, and the repeated use of the word “allege” in the body of the piece, as though there were some doubt on the veracity of Imam Qazwini and his group of pilgrims.  Such language only adds insult to the injury of what actually happened.

In principle, the hajj is when all Muslims come together, when all distinctions of class, ethnicity, denomination, and even gender fall away.  But the ultra-conservative and intellectually primitive Salafis — a movement very close to Saudi wahhabism — will have none of this.  It’s their way or no way.  Their Islam or no Islam.  Like all fundamentalist extremists, of all faiths, they see open minds and open hearts as a threat.  And respond with violence.

Expect a far more moderate response from the Islamic Center of North America than I am capable of.  And expect nothing from the Saudi “investigation.”  Year by year, as glitzy multi-million-dollar high-rises go up around the Kaaba itself, the Saudis bear ever greater resemblance to the seventh-century elite who profited from pilgrimage in the pre-Islamic years, charging exorbitant fees for everything from water to access to holy sites.  In fact an essential part of Muhammad’s Quranic message protested exactly this.

But even that pre-Islamic elite insisted on preserving the pilgrimage as a time of absolute non-violence.

What, then, does the Saudi tolerance of Salafi intolerance make them?

Share this post:  Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
File under: fundamentalism, Islam | Tagged: Tags: attack, Islamic Center of North America, Mecca, Salafi, Saudi Arabia, Shia, Sunni | 6 Comments
  1. moranpro says:
    October 23, 2013 at 11:21 am

    In defense of the Detroit Free Press, they used the language they did to protect themselves from potential libel allegations. If they had serious doubts as to the veracity of the story, they most likely would not have run it at all.

    There is no defense for the Saudi regime looking the other way, but this should hardly be surprising. While they might be a [political/strategic] ally, they remain an example of religious dogma and intolerance.

    I share your skepticism regarding the potential fruits of a Saudi investigation, but they might make some token arrests as a gesture to U.S.-Saudi relations.

  2. Nasir says:
    October 23, 2013 at 11:44 am

    An ugly incident and totally un Islamic! Muslims (not Islam) are fallen today and a mere shadow of their former glory. The guy Saud (and so Saudi Arabia) patronized the so-called reformer Wahab and installed by the Brits & US (replacing the old Hashemites) and who to date remain their staunch alley and for this reason moderate Muslims dont like them. Mecca is central to Islam/Muslims as perhaps Jerusalem still is to Judeo-Christians. God will deal with them all.

  3. Roxana Arama says:
    October 23, 2013 at 2:12 pm

    I read the news report when you posted it on Facebook, and then I read the comments to your link. I was shocked to see that most people dismissed the report as some sort of conspiracy between the Shia pilgrims and the US Embassy to make Saudi Arabia look bad. Blame the victim before even taking another look! The details in the story look plausible to me, so even if there’re legal concerns when reporting, the leap to denial seemed impossible. But seeing not just one person deny that this story could happen, but many, made me realize – again – how intractable this conflict really is.

  4. Ross says:
    October 23, 2013 at 4:57 pm

    I’m reluctant from a position of lacking real knowledge of these affairs to spread misinformation, but I would say that the Syrian crisis has engendered low level conflicts within the Australian Muslim community which, on the whole, stay within that community.

    There are a substantial number of Muslims of Lebanese and Syrian origin in Australia (few of Saudi origin) and some young men, particularly of Sunni faith, have been inflamed by the Syrian and other situations. The only real act beyond posturing that I am aware of, as an everyday Australian, is the call for boycotts of Shia run businesses.

    That said, the following does not really surprise me:

    http://www.5pillarz.com/2013/10/19/anti-shia-sectarianism-on-hajj-is-a-worrying-trend/

    The ring-leader of the attackers has been identified by witnesses as a notorious thug from Australia who has previous. He has been arrested by the Australian authorities for physically attacking other Muslims (both Sunni and Shia) who refused to support the Syrian rebels in the past. Let us be under no illusion here, these takfeeri thugs disguised as hajjis were intent on murder, they were shouting this as they launched their 200-man strong attack.

  5. Sohail Kizilbash says:
    October 24, 2013 at 8:41 am

    I have just returned from Hajj and I hereby lodge my protest against the behaviour of the Saudi police and religious muttavas, who did NOT let us pray peacefully even in the courtyard of the Prophet’s mosque in Madinah nor in the roof top terrace at the Haram in Makkah. We had to hold our prayer meetings in a room of the hotel. It is disgraceful and a shame that we went all the way to the Holy cities and could not pray at the Mosques as we wanted. Why should the Salafi or Wahabi view be imposed on the rest of the Muslim world?

  6. tonosanchezreig says:
    October 24, 2013 at 4:53 pm

    Reblogged this on Al-Must'arib (the vocational Mossarab) and commented:
    Annd we seat and observe… yeah…. they r on their 15th century, as we were… and fighting religious wars as we did. Hmm…. history keeps rhyming.

The Battle of the Muhammad Movies

Posted March 18th, 2013 by Lesley Hazleton

Coming soon to a screen near you:  not one but two biopics about the life of Muhammad.  One from Iran, one from Qatar.  In other words:  one Shia, one Sunni.

Oy.

And double oy.  Because how do you make a movie about someone you can’t show on the screen?  Images of Muhammad are a no-no in Islam.  Though a few medieval Persian miniatures do show his cloaked figure, his face is blanked out — a white oval in the otherwise vividly colored painting.

quinnNo surprise, then, that there hasn’t been a feature movie about Muhammad since 1976, when Libya’s Muammar Qaddafi — yes, that Qaddafi — funded “The Message,” starring Anthony Quinn (shown here at left) as Muhammad’s uncle Hamza.

Who played Muhammad?  Nobody.  The solution was not to show him at all.  Instead, the camera acted as his eyes.  When the camera panned, you were supposed to think that this was what Muhammad was seeing.  The result was… less than convincing.

What was all too convincing was the violence surrounding the movie’s planned US debut in 1977.  Twelve Nation of Islam extremists not given to fact-checking heard a rumor that Quinn had played not Hamza, but Muhammad himself.  They laid siege to three buildings in Washington DC, where they held 149 hostages and killed a journalist and a police officer until they were persuaded by the combined efforts of the Egyptian, Pakistani, and Iranian ambassadors to surrender.  (The whole miserable story is here.)

Of course the hostage-takers hadn’t seen the movie.  If they had, they might have been amazed by its stereotypical blandness.  And they’d never be aware of their ironic role in ensuring that the director, Moustapha Akkad, gave up on religious-themed movies after “The Message,” made a small fortune directing Jamie Lee Curtis in the famed “Halloween” sequels, and then in 2005 went to a wedding in Jordan and got blown up by a suicide bomber.

If it seems way past time that a better film about Muhammad be made, the question remains how it can be done without violence.  And the problem remains of how to do it without showing him.

The highly regarded Iranian director Majid Majidi (“Children of Heaven,” “Color of Paradise”) began work on his $30-million movie last October, and reportedly intends to show Muhammad’s cloaked figure, but not his face.  In short order, an outraged denunciation came from Cairo’s al-Azhar University, followed by the announcement of plans for a rival movie from Sunni-majority Qatar,  with the blessing of a top Muslim Brotherhood theologian and a budget ranging, in various reports, from $200 million to $1 billion.

So how will the two movies differ, aside from the obvious lavishness of production moola and the issue of cloaked figure or no figure?  If you’ve read After the Prophet, you’ll know that the Iranian movie will likely give a far greater role to Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law Ali, whom Shia believe Muhammad designated as his successor — his first khalifa, or caliph.  The Qatari movie will just as likely give a heftier role to Muhammad’s father-in-law abu-Bakr, who in fact became the first caliph of Sunni Islam.  In other words, the two movies are likely to act out the Sunni-Shia split.

I guess acting it out with cameras is far preferable to doing so with guns, but the risk of course is that angry denunciations such as that of al-Azhar will only encourage the latter.

croweMeanwhile, Hollywood seems determined not to be left out of the prophets (and, of course, the profits).  Two biopics of Moses are reportedly in the works, with names like Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, and Ang Lee being bandied around with Hollywood abandon and zero confirmation.  And gird your loins for a biopic of Noah due for release next year, with the ark-builder being played by the star of “The Gladiator,” Russell Crowe.

Somehow I can’t quite imagine Russell Crowe with an olive branch…

Share this post:  Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
File under: art, Christianity, Islam, Judaism | Tagged: Tags: abu-Bakr, After the Prophet, al-Azhar, Ali, Anthony Quinn, biopics, Hamza, Iran, Majid Majidi, Qaddafi, Qatar, Russell Crowe, Shia, Sunni, The Message | 16 Comments
  1. Jerry M says:
    March 18, 2013 at 3:33 pm

    The story of Muhammed could make a compelling movie as long as they would play it straight. If you remember “The Last Temptation of Christ”, you will know that religious movies can be done that don’t turn the main character into a plaster saint. Unfortunately I don’t think anyone of Scorcese’s caliber is going to work on this movie. My own preference is for something on the order of “Lawrence of Arabia”. Stunning visuals and action scenes. I don’t think the backers have the guts to play the story straight.

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      March 18, 2013 at 4:44 pm

      You surely remember the protests over The Last Temptation of Christ, even though it was clearly fiction, based on Kazantzakis’ novel.

      • Jerry M says:
        March 18, 2013 at 6:35 pm

        Yes, I do remember the protests. In fact when I saw the movie during an afternoon showing in New Jersey, I found out later that the evening showing was picketted. I was sorry I missed it.

  2. Ali Scott says:
    March 18, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    Bit of an aside but was shocked about the mention of Nation Of Islam members in the siege, since the NOI generally have a less than orthodox stance towards the Prophet (SAW) and were at least officially antiviolence, but then the wiki article said they were part of a “Hanafi Muslim Movement” which i have never heard of (in the context of the NOI, aware of the Sunni madhab). Do you know if they were closer to conventional Hanafis or an offshoot of NOI teachings and theology? Sorry, have a weird interest in that whole area of things.

    Looking forward to seeing both of these films if I can iA, it’s a fascinating story. Granted it will be slanted in whatever direction the directors’ affiliations lie, but that is to be expected. Feels like at this point he is as much a myth for us to project our desires onto as a historical figure. And will save a lot of the emotional and spiritual wrestling with the historical figure your last book provoked in me! Would be very difficult to watch the killings of the Banu Qurayza and the Medinan poets onscreen.

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      March 18, 2013 at 10:04 pm

      Wish I could tell you more re that 1977 incident, Ali, but I was still in Jerusalem at the time it happened. (It does sound from that wiki entry as though Islam was being used as a secondary rationale, but I really don’t know.) It did kill general release of the movie, which nonetheless went on to become very popular in mosques and Islamic centers.
      I’m not sure whether to apologize or to be complimented that ‘The First Muslim’ provoked emotional and spiritual wrestling on your part. Maybe complimented, because it sounds as though you’ve come through it stronger. Re the movies now in the works, you’re right, of course. But I do hope they include at least some emotional and spiritual wrestling on the part of Muhammad, thus according him the depth and complexity of human reality.

  3. Hashmi says:
    March 18, 2013 at 10:42 pm

    You are so well read and have a deep insight into Islam and other religions plus the the high esteem the last Prophet (peace be upon him) is held in.. then why do you use his name so casually, disregarding all respect…

    • SusieOfArabia says:
      March 19, 2013 at 3:27 am

      Hashmi – With all due respect, the Muslim habit of always including PBUH with the mention of the Prophet’s name is something that Muslims do. Non-Muslims don’t do this, nor do we consider it disrespectful not to. Please stop taking offense where none is intended – and the world will be a better and more peaceful place.

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      March 19, 2013 at 9:48 am

      I think it would be hypocritical of me to refer to Muhammad in the traditional Muslim manner, since I am not Muslim.

  4. Sam says:
    March 19, 2013 at 6:13 am

    Mustapha Akkad’s movie is not that bad…. also there are some manuscripts from the Mongol Period in Iran (especially the Ilkhanid period i am not too sure about the Timurid period) which have depictions of Prophet Mohammed without a veil a very famous one is The compendium of the World or Jami’h al-Tawarikh by Rashid ud-Din but there are other Miraj-Nameh (the story of the Isra wa al Miraj) for example which have copious amounts of depictions of the Prophet without any veil…
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Ilkhanid-Book-Ascension-Persian-Sunni/dp/184511499X/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1363698618&sr=8-5&keywords=christiane+gruber

    http://www.amazon.com/COMPENDIUM-CHRONICLES-al-Dins-Illustrated-Collection/dp/019727627X/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1363698686&sr=1-2&keywords=sheila+blair+world

  5. Ali Scott says:
    March 19, 2013 at 6:27 am

    It was definitely a compliment. Loved the book even while struggling at times. I think all too often people want to strip away his humanity and just leave this semi-divine archetypal figure in his place. Which is obviously not cool, Islamically speaking. The Qur’an itself admonishes him for making mistakes. And he lived in a fundamentally different era in a different social context to the one we live in today. To me it is more about being inspired by who he was to the society he was in rather than imitating his actions literally. I think one does faith a disservice if not intellectually honest with it.

    The Medina period does seem quite incongruous, but power is a tricky thing. I struggle to reconcile Medina with my own morality and reason, but there’s still Mecca, and Islam for me is about far more than the Prophet (SAW) himself.

    I do think were the films to depict some of the more controversial events in Medina there might be a backlash, from islamophobes saying “See! I told you so!” and from some Muslims assuming they had invented them. Many of my friends aren’t really aware of that side of things. It’s a difficult topic that I don’t think I will ever have the answer to.

    Oh and meant to say I loved After the Prophet too! Thank you for your books, your words here and your TED talks, apologies for the monster comment!

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      March 19, 2013 at 9:53 am

      Thanks for confirming, Ali. Particularly appreciate your saying “I think one does faith a disservice if not intellectually honest with it,” and with your permission, intend to adopt it. — L.

      • Ali Scott says:
        March 19, 2013 at 2:24 pm

        I would be honoured if you did.

  6. Ali Scott says:
    March 19, 2013 at 6:27 am

    *monster-sized comment i mean

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      March 19, 2013 at 9:54 am

      Understood! Here be no monsters.

  7. saimma says:
    July 14, 2013 at 12:43 pm

    Lesley – love your Ted talks and so happy to find your website. Excellent article and I look forward to making my way through the rest.

    BTW – I am a Muslim and I do not feel the need to say ‘Peace be upon him’ every time the Prophet’s name is said. You speak about him with more respect that most Muslims do in their behaviour. Respect and honouring is about more than four words.

    In gratitude

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      July 14, 2013 at 6:02 pm

      My feeling too — Thanks Saimma.

Iraq in Fragments

Posted August 30th, 2010 by Lesley Hazleton

The movie to watch tomorrow after Obama’s speech:  James Longley’s documentary Iraq in Fragments, more timely than ever and yet timeless.

I saw it when it first came out in 2006, but maybe I was too focused then on the ‘now-ness’ of documentaries, or I was blinded by my own imagined ‘expertise’ on Iraq as I worked on After the Prophet. I  remember thinking it a good movie, but somehow it didn’t imprint itself on my over-researched brain.

But now the President’s about to declare an end to the American combat mission in Iraq – and to do it even as the violence ramps up again, despite strangely other-worldly assurances from D.C. that it‘s lessened.   Now everyone’s breathing easier because we’re “getting out” of Iraq (we aren’t, of course — we’re just rebranding some combat troops as support-and-assist troops, adding a huge number of Blackwater/Xe-type mercenaries paid by the State Department instead of the Pentagon (as though that will make all the difference), and moving other combat units out of the Iraqi frying pan into the Afghanistan fire).  So it seemed a good time to rent the DVD of Longley’s movie and take a second look.

And this time it both took my breath away and just about broke my heart.

Where was my head in 2006?  How was I not haunted as I now am by the fear and desperate hope in the eyes of Muhammad, the eleven-year-old Sunni boy living a Dickensian working life in a filthy auto-parts repair shop in Baghdad as American helicopters thunder overhead?

How did the pleas of the blindfolded and beaten men accused by Muqtada al-Sadr’s fired-up Shia followers of selling alcohol in the southern city of Nasariya not echo in my ears?

How did I blank out the elderly father dreaming of an independent Kurdistan in a small village in the north, even as his son surrenders his dreams of medical school for work at the local brick oven, shown belching huge plumes of oily smoke into a Ken-Burns-gorgeous sunset?

These are the real lives and dreams affected by America’s war in Iraq, though there’s no attempt to push that point in the three parts of this movie.  In fact there’s no omniscient narrator at all. The only voice-over narration is that of the Iraqis Longley follows with his camera, and they speak about themselves from a place deep inside.  They let him in, trusting him to not to judge, and he doesn’t.  Instead, he makes their stories both utterly of the place and yet universal.

‘Iraq in Fragments’ has been called – rightly – a documentary masterpiece (acknowledged by, among others, Sundance awards for directing, cinematography, and editing, and a nomination for best documentary at the Oscars, where the young Muhammad lost out to Al Gore and An Inconvenient Truth).  But its power is all the greater by contrast with the best-known “Iraq war movie” – best-picture Oscar winner The Hurt Locker, which presented itself as a fictionalized documentary.

Trouble is, ‘The Hurt Locker’ wasn’t really about Iraq.  It was  yet another in the long series of American movies where “the meaning of war” is seen entirely through American eyes.  Iraq was all but incidental to ‘The Hurt Locker,’ as were Iraqis.   The place and the people were merely a stage on which Americans played their drama.  ‘Iraq in Fragments,’ by contrast, takes you behind the stage, and quietly and devastatingly shows the effect on those who were merely ‘The Hurt Locker’s’ scenery.

So by all means watch the President’s speech tomorrow, but then be a mensch, and watch this movie.

———————————————————

By way of a coda to both Obama’s speech and ‘Iraq in Fragments,’ you could do worse than consider what General Ray Odierno, the departing commander of American forces in Iraq, said in the NYT today:

“We came in very naïve about what the problems were in Iraq; I don’t think we understood what I call the societal devastation that occurred,” he said, citing the Iran-Iraq war, the Persian Gulf war and the international sanctions from 1990 to 2003 that wiped out the middle class. “And then we attacked to overthrow the government,” he said.

The same went for the country’s ethnic and sectarian divisions, he said: “We just didn’t understand it.”

To advocates of the counterinsurgency strategy that General Odierno has, in part, come to symbolize, the learning curve might highlight the military’s adaptiveness. Critics of a conflict that killed an estimated 100,000 Iraqis, perhaps far more, and more than 4,400 American soldiers might see the acknowledgment as evidence of the war’s folly.

Asked if the United States had made the country’s divisions worse, General Odierno said, “I don’t know.”

“There’s all these issues that we didn’t understand and that we had to work our way through,” he said. “And did maybe that cause it to get worse? Maybe.”

Share this post:  Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
File under: art, Middle East, war | Tagged: Tags: 'end of combat mission', Baghdad, documentary, Iraq war, James Longley, Kurdistan, Nasariya, President Obama, Shia, Sunni | 2 Comments
  1. Robert Corbett says:
    August 30, 2010 at 10:15 am

    Lesley,

    There was a good interview about Iraq on Weekday this morning. http://kuow.org/program.php?id=21217. The first speaker was very good at explaining how inside Iraq the voices were (and are) multiplex. And the LRB had a scary piece about the sanctions recently, the link for which I could dig up.

    • Lesley Hazleton says:
      August 30, 2010 at 10:30 am

      Thanks for the KUOW link, Robert — and yes, if you find that London Review of Books piece on sanctions, could you post the link as another comment? Thanks again — L.

Stunning “Icons”

Posted May 23rd, 2010 by Lesley Hazleton

What art can do:

gently, provocatively, and in its own way reverently — recreate the sacred.

The image on the right is a devotional poster of Imam Hussein, Muhammad’s grandson, whose death in Iraq in the year 680 became the crystallizing point of the Shia-Sunni split.   While Islam formally frowns on figurative art,  popular Islam throughout the Middle East revels in it.   Markets, kiosks, pavement stores, homes are full of such brightly colored posters.  They show everything from popular shrines to the revered Shia Imams to the horse Muhammad rode on his night journey from Mecca to Jerusalem.

The deliberate mirror image on the left is of a contemporary Iranian woman.  What you see here is just a still:   the actual piece is a video portrait, and the woman moves slightly and breathes as the camera runs.  The five-foot high portrait, called “Icon #3.” is part of an exhibit by Iranian-born filmmaker Shoja Azari, running in New York through Friday (details and more info here).

In making this particular image, Azari — the partner of Shirin Neshat, director of the movie “Women Without Men” — was thinking of Neda Soltan, the student killed last June in Tehran during the protests following Iran’s disputed election.  Her image as she lay dying, blood streaming from one eye, from her nose, and from the corner of her mouth, became an instant icon in itself.

I am stunned by Icon #3.   I love the traditional posters and would have included them in “After the Prophet” if Doubleday hadn’t gasped at the expense (you can see a few here), but what Azari has done is give them fresh meaning and relevance.  He honors the iconic images even as he adapts them.

And no, there’s no question of sacrilege.  In fact Azari is solidly in the tradition of Islamic protest.  Iconic images were similarly adapted during the 1979-80 Iranian Revolution, and are still being used in posters of such contemporary political figures as Muqtada al-Sadr, head of Iraq’s Mahdi Army, and Hassan Nasrallah, the Lebanese head of Hizbollah.

If you can make it to the “Icons” exhibit, which for some reason is only up through this coming Friday, I am incredibly envious — for once I wish I was in New York!   And if you go, do please report back here to this envious Accidental Theologist.

Share this post:  Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
File under: art, Islam, Middle East | Tagged: Tags: After the Prophet, devotional posters, Icons, Imam Hussein, Iran, Shia, Shirin Neshat, Shoja Azari, Sunni, video portraits, Women Without Men | Be the First to leave a comment

Order the Book

Available online from:
  • Amazon.com
  • Barnes & Noble
  • IndieBound
  • Powell's
Or from your favorite bookseller.

Tag Cloud

absurd agnosticism art atheism Christianity ecology existence feminism fundamentalism Islam Judaism light Middle East sanity science technology ugliness US politics war women

Recent Posts

  • Flash! September 1, 2019
  • “What’s Wrong With Dying?” February 9, 2017
  • The Poem That Stopped Me Crying December 30, 2016
  • Talking About Soul at TED December 5, 2016
  • ‘Healing’? No Way. November 10, 2016
  • Psychopath, Defined August 2, 2016
  • Lovely NYT Review of ‘Agnostic’! July 14, 2016
  • Playing With Stillness June 22, 2016
  • Inside Palestine June 20, 2016
  • Virtual Unreality June 6, 2016
  • The Free-Speech Challenge May 23, 2016
  • Category-Free April 20, 2016
  • Staring At The Void April 13, 2016
  • Sherlock And Me April 3, 2016
  • Hard-Wired? Really? March 22, 2016
  • A Quantum Novel March 9, 2016
  • This Pre-Order Thing March 4, 2016
  • The Agnostic Celebration February 29, 2016
  • The First Two Pages February 23, 2016
  • Two Thumbs-Up For “Agnostic” February 10, 2016
Skip to toolbar
  • About WordPress
    • WordPress.org
    • Documentation
    • Support Forums
    • Feedback