Across the country, in the months following 9/11, other events took place; although they were of a different scale, they were equally evil. The murders of Muslims or people identified as Muslims, the willful destruction of Muslim-owned property, and the bullying and mistreatment of people with “Muslim-sounding” names occurred frequently in the guise of retaliation or justice. This atmosphere of intolerance did not sit well with me. I knew that my neighbors who were Muslim were not evil people, and I felt that a faith which had birthed so much beauty over its history could not be solely evil. My own faith was one of the many Christian traditions born in the spiritual renewal which swept through the United States in this nation’s early days. Many of these early Christians had been persecuted by their neighbors due to intolerance and fear born of ignorance; this element within my family’s history helped me to recognize the injustice of what was occurring.

I am a Christian minister, I am an artist, and I am an educator. My responsibility to my faith is to seek God and His goodness wherever they might be found; my drive as an artist is to recognize and share the beauties of God’s creation wherever they may be; and my goal as an educator is to help open minds so they may be receptive to knowledge and the inspiration of God’s love, however it manifests. After 9/11, I was determined to learn about Islam – not from the media-driven mindset of sensationalism and sound-bites, but with an eye open to truth and a mind open to the promptings of the Spirit, and to give the faith the same respect I felt my own beliefs deserve. I met with Muslims and asked them what they believed, and I read the source documents of the faith, the Holy Qur’an and the Hadith. Those who responded to my questions were scholars, imams, sheikhs, and laity from all over the world, from multiple schools of Islamic thought and practice. From these many, many points of view a picture of Islam as a faith and Muslims as a people emerged. This picture shook me profoundly – there was a great deal more we shared than I had thought possible.

Muslims love their children. Muslims believe in God – the same God in which I believe (in Mark 15:34, in the New Testament, Jesus called God “Eloi,” the same word in Aramaic as “Allah”). Muslims love education, finding truth, and caring for their neighbors. The list could go on and on. There was nothing I could find in the Qur’an which said anything about the supposed glories of terrorism; in fact it was plain that such violence angers our Creator more profoundly than almost any other evil. How then could I share this knowledge with those around me? Shortly after asking this question, I happened upon the tradition of the 99 Most Beautiful Names of God, or Asma al-Husna, and I recognized this was not a coincidence. The answer was to begin building and showing glass sculptures to explore the wisdom and meaning of each of the 99 Names from the point of view of a Christian.

The 99 Names Project is meant primarily to provide an excuse for dialog; each work is the result of prayerful research bringing together Muslim views of each Name with the points of convergence I see in my own Christian faith. As such, the initial dialog begins with me. I read references to the Names in the Qur’an as well as in the writings of scholars like Rumi. I visit Muslim scholars, ecclesiastical leaders, and laity, and ask them about the Names. I then cross-reference what I learn with what I find in the Bible. Then, I prayerfully consider what motifs and designs in Islamic artistic tradition best correspond with what I have discovered; develop new images and patterns emulating traditional works; and build up shapes with the sculptures to communicate this whole process of learning. One of the first things I discovered is that unlike in my own Christian tradition, figurative work having to do with the Deity is entirely inappropriate in Islamic tradition, so the works are abstract and non-representational.

There are three elements which consistently return in the works. The most visible is geometry: all truth comes from the same Source regardless of the site of its discovery or the language of its transmission. It seemed the best way to symbolize this is through the purity of mathematics and its material manifestation. Another primary element is architectural structure. One truth shared between my Christian faith and that of my Muslim brothers is the honor and responsibility of building the kingdom of God on earth, and the earliest Muslim buildings were shared in peace by the believers of many faiths. The third element is a bookbinding sensibility. The widespread use of art in books is perhaps the most important element shared among my sculptures because it symbolizes the vital role of the Qur’an. In my Christian faith, I recognize Jesus as the Word of God made flesh and he is the bridge connecting me to God; in Islam, the Word of God is made legible, and the miraculous bridge uniting God and man can be read every day.

Building the Name Forgiving (Al-Ghaffar) is a good example of the overall process. The shape was built as a softened cube and doors were mounted on each surface, perpetually pointing inward. The design elements were drawn from Ottoman history, one of the most pluralist and inclusive societies of medieval times. The floor of the sculpture is etched and painted with the traditional 8-pointed star and cross pattern known as “Compassionate Breath,” and a cup of white liquid is in the center. I had considered several colors for the liquid, including clear and gold, but felt prompted to use white.

At the first display of the finished sculpture, a Turkish man complimented me on the work and asked why I had placed milk in the center of the welcoming doors. I explained I had no idea, but felt compelled by something outside myself. He explained that the cup was filled with the color of the rivers of heaven, and felt the sculpture was just right. The ongoing experience of this project is a dance between what I am learning about Muslims and the nudges or promptings I receive; these are my heartfelt responses to the Divine Names of God, built from a place of reverence and respect for those I now know are my spiritual siblings, fellow children of father Abraham. I may have no idea why the nudge or prompt to action comes, but experiences like this one show me how important it is to listen to that small voice.

When this project started, I was given counsel by many of the Muslims I interviewed to take my time and open my heart to Divine guidance. It has taken 3 years to build the first 25 sculptures, and I have documented these in a book, 99 Names: 1 to 25 (A Christian’s Exploration of the Names of God from the Qur’an in Glass). There has been some negative feedback, including a very small minority of Muslims who felt it was inappropriate for a non-Muslim to examine Muslim themes and a few Christians concerned I was losing my perspective as a Christian. However, something remarkable happened. Throughout this process, I have learned about many points of agreement and separation in our respective faiths. I have rejoiced in our similarities and I respect our differences – and rather than diluting my Christian beliefs, my faith has expanded, grown, and deepened. As Fethullah Gülen teaches, something holy happens through the process of education, and such an exercise can only result in the growth of those involved.

These sculptures are meant to show our many points of convergence and understanding, and to celebrate opportunities for learning, dialog, and friendship. Regardless of the faith we claim or how we pronounce the Name of our Creator, we are all, first and foremost, human and His creations. God is Beautiful and loves beauty, and I pray He finds this offering acceptable.

99 Names: 1 to 25
A Christian’s Exploration of the Names of God from the Qur’an in Glass
2013
978-1490510750
CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform

Today, many grade-school children do not know that milk comes from cows and eggs come from chickens. They think it all comes from the refrigerator. And if it is not there, it comes from mom—and she brings it home from the car. The Texas Nature Project in Mason, Texas, is a program initiated to help such students develop a better relationship with nature and understand that bounties do not come from mom’s small kitchen but rather, the generous kitchen of the All-Merciful and All-Providing, one as broad as the earth. Kelli Angelone interviewed Dr. Sherra Theisen on this project. Since locating to the 100-acre Northpoint Ranch in June of 2006, the project has provided hands-on programming for over 10,000 college students and their families on site, and over 100,000 young Texans through outreach programming. Dr. Theisen also has a book published online The Thoughtful Child’s Book of Rhymes with Reason that guides caregivers in helping their children aged 3-12 or so, to work through the kinds of moral dilemmas they already face. Book proceeds support programming for Texas Nature Project. Poetry by Jan Schultz, Illustrations by Sherra Theisen.

“Oak trees always make acorns. How do they know? They don’t have to know, but somebody does!” Dr. Sherra Theisen gestures to the landscape just a few hundred yards away. The two of us lounge on the porch behind her big country home in Mason, Texas. My travelling companion drifts comfortably back and forth in Dr. Theisen’s porch swing and our photographers alternate between exploring the property and photographing our conversation. Millie the Beagle can’t decide whether she should lie in Dr. Theisen’s lap or continue making friends with the photographers traipsing around in her yard.

Millie’s yard is big enough for all of us. It extends for a hundred acres, and she need not worry that the nice young men might ruin the grass. Most of her ‘yard’ is forested land, with rocks, a stream, cactus, and even a herd of deer that pop in every evening, right behind the fence that separates the house from the wilderness. Dr. Sherra Theisen, doctor of philosophy, is a one-woman (pacifist) army out on the front lines of the war between community and apathy, justice and chaos.

She and Ms. Jan Schultz organized the Texas Nature Project in Mason, Texas, a program through which they help high school and college students to have a better relationship with nature. They live in a house on the edge of Texas wilderness, inviting students to visit and learn about nature and, by extension, about themselves. The Texas Nature Project was born out of the Saint Augustine Program at the University of St. Thomas in Houston, Texas. After designing and implementing the St. Augustine Program to introduce incoming freshman to nature, God, philosophy, and service learning, Jan and Dr. Theisen realized they could be offering a more intensive program that reached out to students of all ages. In addition, they hope the Texas Nature Project will soon be able to offer college credits.

As a former student of Dr. Theisen’s, I was thrilled to learn about her new program and the philosophy behind it, which was surely similar to the St. Augustine Program, but much more exciting in the wilderness setting. The University of St. Thomas is located in the middle of Houston, Texas—not quite as breathtaking as the beautiful scenery around us in Mason.

K.A: What do you hope students will take away from the Texas Nature Project in relation to the environment?

DR. THEISEN: Can you imagine thinking that we don’t need trees? Thinking that planting trees is some kind of luxury, or something childish? More than 50% of Americans live in urban areas. And that means that they don’t have experiences like people my age took for granted. If you didn’t live in the country, you always knew somebody who had a farm. So you would spend some time [there], and you knew how to milk cows and you knew how to pick up eggs…

Today, grade-school kids—many of them don’t know that milk comes from cows or eggs come from chickens. They think it all comes from the refrigerator. And if it’s not there, where does it come from before that? From mom. Where does mom get it? She brings it in from the car. I’m serious. This is what I do when I go to do the outreach programming [for Texas Nature Project]—letting the parents see that the kids do not know that they are natural beings themselves, that their health depends on the health of the whole planet.

Americans now spend 4% of their time outdoors. Four percent in outdoor activities. Because they’re terrified, terrified of the outdoors… Kids are more and more two-dimensional. And they have computers everywhere they go, technology everywhere they go, cell phones, video games, big screen televisions, computers, but it can have an alienating effect because what you can learn on the computer is about rainforests and everything else, and that you have no power to effect any change. So it can be overwhelming. And that’s why we’re focusing on ethics of place.

K.A: Who wants to go outside when they think their air is bad, when there is ozone depletion and it’s dangerous to go outside?

DR. THEISEN: [That] could be, but if you’re afraid, the thing is that the fear comes from what we don’t know. Like how healthy it is for us to be outdoors.

At the University of St. Thomas, a Catholic university, the mission was to try to connect and educate the entire human person. So, at the Augustine program that you were a part of, that was the goal. We knew that everything is integrated, that what it means to be a human person is to be an incredibly complex reality, a totality that has an intrinsic relationship to self, to others, to nature, and to the Divine, we would highlight each of those aspects in the readings, but also in the service.

What we found again and again was that it was the experiences in nature that were the most powerful and effective for absolutely everyone. And that is where people found themselves! Suddenly, instead of being very egocentric, students became aware of something larger than themselves that they don’t have complete control over. They encountered the world, the universe in its vastness. And that humility lets them find out who they are in relation to an entire universe, the need for more than one person in the universe.

Really understanding of the land and conversation with it, working together, that co-creative act and then [the students] start to see the Divine in just the vastness and the beauty and the order, the purposefulness, the intelligence…the evidence is suddenly overwhelming for it. From a philosophical standpoint it’s that St. Thomas approach where he says “It’s impossible to deny the existence of God, if you just pay attention.” ‘There’s this whole world—I didn’t make it, I can’t make it, I can barely understand it, but something does, and it’s bigger than me.’ And that’s opening up to the Divine.

K.A: How is the program run? Why bring it to Mason, Texas?

DR. THEISEN: That experience, [the Augustine program] after four years, was incredibly successful and continues to be: people like yourself continue to come back. We’ve developed these long-term friendships and associations, and people’s lives have changed to service-lives. What we decided to do was to do [the same program] in a more directed and serious and intensive way.

Jan was the co-creator of that program and then co-runner. Hers is more administrative and student development, mine is more academic and service maybe. And that’s the origin of Texas Nature Project.

We want to make this available to all Texas college students instead of just the ones that happen to be at ‘this’ university, we want to do it year-round, we want to be able to do it for every major, which is really a critical thing too. We don’t leave it to the experts—we recognize that there’s purposefulness in every single human life. If we didn’t need 7 billion people, they wouldn’t be here.

K.A: Do you hope to do that with the Texas Nature Project also (as was done with the St. Augustine Program)—bring in people of different faiths and different backgrounds?

DR. THEISEN: It’s about the shared experience of, well, there’s just this one planet (laughs). That we share our common humanity, that we share the planet, and people relax in nature, that’s the other beautiful thing—every architectural structure is somehow inculcating culture, right? And you have presuppositions about what is an appropriate activity that occurs in this space or that space. When you get outdoors, it’s open. And everybody kind of relaxes and breathes, and they can warm up, and it is a place to share everything in a safe way.

K.A: What role does science play in your curriculum?

DR. THEISEN: Science has a really important role. Now again we’re operating from a trans-disciplinary viewpoint. What that means to say is that it’s interdisciplinary, but frequently the idea of interdisciplinary is [the thought that] maybe I can connect 3 or 4 disciplines, but what we mean to say by transdisciplinary is (and I didn’t make up the word, it was Vartan Gregorian that introduced the word. He was president of the Carnegie Foundation) that we recognize everything is connected.

But, education has come so far with specialties and sub-specialties and sub- sub-specialties that it becomes more and more fragmented in practice. And if somebody is going to specialize in biology, they can’t even do that. It’s got to be microbiology or macrobiology or plant biology.

K.A: That’s what I’ve found with my own career.

DR. THEISEN: Yes, and what you need now is a specialist who’s a generalist as a speciality. That’s what a philosopher’s always been, so perfectly natural. But, so what you do is you specialize in the connections.

Scientifically, we’re working with the LCRA, which is the Lower Colorado River Authority, in doing monthly water testing of the Llano River. So we have on this property a live spring and two seasonal creeks, and they feed into Comanche Creek, and Comanche Creek feeds into Llano river, and the Llano River feeds into the Colorado River which means that you’re serving millions of people in Texas with water.

Then you get a sense of the whole, how land use is filtering into the water that people are drinking a hundred miles away. And so again you’re seeing the interconnectedness instead of doing chemistry just in a classroom where you test a sample that you picked up somewhere.

K.A: What other philosophical leaders, or founders, thinkers, not even necessarily philosophical thinkers, have you based this program on?

DR. THEISEN: In some ways what we’re doing is not brand new. A somewhat influential philosopher in the West—Plato, [she says with a grin] in the Republic, his most mature work, says, “All education begins at birth, and it starts with a noble lie. And the lie is: The earth is your mother. And the rest of your formal education, until you are 35 years old, or 50 if you intend to be a leader, will be based on that: The earth is your mother.”

It’s noble because if you don’t understand it, you will not live in the right ways. You will not be able to defend and protect your mother earth, right? And so you get your nobility from your recognition that the earth is your mother. It’s a lie because the earth is not your biological mother and of course you have a biological mother, but so much more is the earth your mother because she is a means of providing you with food and shelter throughout your entire life, and your biological mother does not and cannot.

Up until that time, 15-1600s, everybody who went to college was a philosopher because it meant you had to know everything. In order to answer any question you had to have a view—a universal view—of how your specialty fit in. It was all philosophy, all PhDs—that’s why it’s called a Ph.D.—a doctor of philosophy. So for the last 400 years though, now we’ve got these specializations, sub-specializations, so literature is still a Ph.D., but they don’t get that they need a bigger view. So the economist, it’d be a PhD but they don’t get that they need the bigger view, and the biologist is getting a Ph.D., but they don’t get that they need the bigger view because they’re working so hard on their own specialty.

K.A: There needs to be a connection to the bigger picture?

DR. THEISEN: [She nods] Our program is integrative, trans-disciplinary. Not just integrating disciplines, but integrating theory and practice. Connecting learning and life, so what we’re connecting is people to other people, people to their communities, learning to other learning, and all learning to life—not just the practical life and theoretical life, but the day to day living. I’m sure you know that service learning is kind of a new idea, maybe a decade old in universities, because students were reporting again and again that they found their education irrelevant.

As soon as they graduated they didn’t know why they spent all that time just to get a piece of paper. They didn’t see how it connects to their life. You need to be more deliberate in not just talking about how it connects but day to day showing people. That was what the Augustine program was about, day in and day out a community of research and of education and discussion and getting the connections. ‘Interdisciplinary’ in getting the connections between, but in the end you get a universal so you always know how you fit in. And so that ethics of place is: how do I live given this is my ecosystem?

K.A: So, is there an inherent connection here between philosophy and environmental science?

DR. THEISEN: Absolutely. The number one overriding concern of philosophy and philosophers is justice. Justice is the achievement of the good for everything and everyone. And what we’re always trying to do is bridge the gap, but there is no gap. It’s one place. It’s your home. It’s all about what is the right way to live? What is a good way? A worthwhile—not ‘right’ in the oppressive way but what’s a worthwhile way for human beings to live? The worthwhile way is that I work hard to achieve your good because your good is my good.

You can find more information about the non-profit Texas Nature Project at: www.texasnatureproject.org. The website contains information regarding the program’s curriculum as well as contact information for Dr. Sherra Theisen and her co-founder, Jan Schulz. The Texas Nature Project is currently accepting donations through its website to further its goals of nature education and community involvement.

Kelli Angelone is a former student of Dr. Theisen’s. She currently works as an Air Quality Planner in the Houston area, managing grants and conducting outreach. Kelli is also working on her Master of Liberal Arts in English at the University of St. Thomas, where she previously received her Bachelor’s in Environmental Studies and minors in Creative Writing and Philosophy.

With half the world living on less than $2.50 per day and with 46.2 million people in the United States living below the poverty line, poverty is a growing concern.

The United States is known all over the world to be a very powerful and rich country. It is not just American people who believe in the American Dream, but also many people from other countries have been dreaming of coming to the US to live in better conditions. Although the US is thought to be a rich country, we still see hungry and homeless people, especially women and children in the streets. Women, who are either married or unmarried, whether supported by their husbands or single mothers with no support, struggle to earn money for food, clothes, safe shelter, and other intangible needs such as love and happiness. When observed closely, it is easy to understand the reasons why this is so. It is because of the wage gap between men and women, the decreased amount of opportunities in having high income jobs, and the fact that more women are the head of their household compared to men, means that the ratio of poor women is rising, and the increased need for governmental help makes “welfare” necessary.

Understanding the definition of poverty becomes very important because it categorizes people into groups which are poor and wealthy. Richard Ropers states that poverty can be understood and described in numerous ways, and that people will not understand the meaning of poverty if they do not recognize the situation of the poor. To be poor means to not have any sustenance, shelter, or any support from family. However nowadays, living alone, or being pushed out of society, being under depression of unchanging destitution also describes poverty. Being fired from a job, losing self-esteem, having no power, or being away from cultural values are also other parameters to describe poverty (Ropers, 25). Ropers also describes “widespread poverty” as a disloyalty to the democratic values’ failure to gain optimism. Successful leaders must aim to provide economical comfort for their citizens. If the majority of the people are not happy because of poverty, it means the government is not as strong to deal with the problems.

The official poverty line is inadmissible as an accurate system to determine the number of poor people. “The US government identifies the poverty line by multiplying the cost of a minimally nutritious diet by three,” then the number of people who live in the same house is calculated (Popers 35). According to the Census data for 2011, 46.2 million people in the United States lived below the poverty line. According to Peter Edelman, a law professor in Georgetown University, even though there are so many hard working people, they are still living in poverty or just barely above the poverty line (Bilitteri, 723). These people are not given the necessary governmental support. There is also a huge gap between the poor and the wealthy people in the US (Cooper, 337). The highest income is $102,000 for households, just 1% of the population, and the lowest earning is $250 for people, who make up 90% of the population, explains Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez (Bilitteri, 723).

One given image portrayed in the media is that “the poor have only themselves to blame” (Mantsios, 638). The problem of poverty is not just one individual’s problem. There is a strong connection between the poor and society. How can a defenseless child be responsible for being poor, not having shelter, and for not earning any money? How can a single or divorced mother with a little baby, without any family help, be expected to work full time without feeding the little one for hours. The term “poor are eyesores” (Mantsios, 637) is not a responsible and thoughtful depiction, rather, it is a way of not being able to see the problems of the people outside and breaking away from the realities of the poor.

More and more women, especially single mothers, are experiencing poverty at a higher rate than the rest of society. Ropers notes that 58% of women are facing poverty, and in this category 48% of the women are the head of their household. According to Albelda and Tilly, 50% of single women are below the poverty line with no support of a husband. In 1993, while 16% of families struggled against poverty, simultaneously, 52% of single mothers, bereft of husband or family support, experiences real difficulty to provide for their basic needs. Most women work at least two jobs at the same time. On the one hand they work at home without earning any money, and on the other hand work outside to earn money (Albelle & Tilly 307). In 1947, about 38% of women were working mostly in paid labor jobs; however, in 1954, the number of working women who were African American, doubled to 54%. Then in 1996 the ratio of working women rose up to 88%, as reported by Albella and Tilly. Even though the number of hard working women is increasing year by year, they are still, except for a small percentage, earning low income and their situation still remains below the poverty line. According to Albelda and Tilly, “women’s earnings are considerably lower than men’s, approximately 70 cents to the man’s dollar.” This difference makes women’s lives miserable as they try to work outside and head the household all at the same time.

For so many years, women have been endeavoring to have the same rights, opportunities, and benefits as men have in their working lives. Although women’s working situations are not as bad as some years ago, women still face graceless and unpleasant discrimination when they look for jobs. Even though women are more educated nowadays and have more opportunities to get a job, there are distinctive wage gaps between men and women. Being the head of the family (Bernstein, 370), giving birth to a child, being under differentiation of occupation, and being sexually abused by employers are some of the common reasons as to why women are behind men when it comes to the benefits of the jobs (Wage Project, 373).

Family responsibilities are one of the most common reasons why women work in a part time job instead of having a full time job (Bernstein, 371). There are so many married or single women who do most of the household responsibilities while trying to work in a job. It is hard to deal with the chores and manage the expectations at work at the same time. For this reason, women in these kinds of situations prefer to work in part time jobs. According to Bernstein, only 25% of women are able to work full day, for the rest of the women cannot dedicate their whole day for work. This being the case, women cannot get the equal remuneration like other women who work in full time jobs. Interestingly, there is also a huge payment gap between women who work full time and men who work full time. Bernstein explains that “on average women work a lot less than men: 1,498 hours a year, vs. 2,219 worked by the typical man.” According to The Wage Project, part time women employees make only 38% of men’s full time yearly salary. Bernstein also mentions the Hartmann and Rose’s data which shows that women employees can have the same benefits if they leave all the family responsibilities behind and come to work behaving like a “traditional man.” The continuation of such unfair treatment is sure to wear down woman, a situation that’s already strained them enough.

Another reason for the wage gap between men and women is the choice a women makes to have a child (Wage Project, 378). Bernstein says after quoting Bergland that after delivering a child, women have to work part time or stay away from work for a while because they do not receive the necessary help from the society.

Nowadays, the position of women employees is assumed to not be as powerful as men’s by most bosses (Wage Project, 377). Even if men and women have the same educational level (Bernstein, 372) and women show more talent, the suggestions made by women are mostly not considered important until, of course, there is no other choice but to accept (Wage project, 375). Bernstein states that women’s yearly salary is much less than men’s, even when they are at the same educational level.

Sexual harassment is another important factor for women to leave their jobs (Wage Project, 377). Sometimes in situations like these, women are unfortunately seen as sexual means by their bosses. If the women, even if they are educated, do not accept the advances of their bosses, they have no choice but to leave or drop out of their jobs, benefits, emotional solidity, and sometimes even their lives (Wage Project, 377). Women encounter such discriminatory situations at the same time while they are dealing with difficulties which they have in their personal lives.

Some people think that people are getting welfare because they are too lazy and they don’t want to work. This theory can be true for just a few people. Making this kind of generalization for all people who are in poverty is derogatory against them. Albelda and Tilly say that the reasons for the poverty experience by single mothers and their families is not because of their laziness or lack of ambition. They are in poverty because they don’t have parent support, they face job discrimination, they earn less than men, and they have the added responsibility of taking care of their children. Blaming the poor is so easy, but being aware of their situation and helping them out of it would be the best thing for all.

Making reforms on the welfare program will make it work well. Some malicious people display themselves as poor to get support from welfare. Under the welfare program, the situation of the applicant must be clarified through an attentive investigation. Determining the really needy persons, eliminating their needs, and opening free high qualified career courses will make welfare a more beneficial program for the poor and will reduce the complaints made against the program.

Being in poverty is mostly not a personal choice. People in poverty don’t just lack food or safe shelter, but they have also lost their hope and happiness. Women, especially single mothers with no support, encounter the most difficult situations of all. Having an income less than men, taking care of their children without any support, facing job discrimination, and heading the family are the most common adversities faced by women today. Receiving no government support will not help reduce their problems; on the contrary, having access to effective government support will let people in poverty know that there are people with helping hands, people who care about them and who think about them. Poor people need helping hands, at least to not let them give up their hopes and dreams.

References

• Albelda, Randy.,& Tilly, Chris. 2001. “‘Women, Income, and Poverty’: There’s a Family connection.” Race, Class, and Gender in The United States. Ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. New Jersey: Worth,. 305-314.
• Billitteri, Thomas J. “Gender Pay Gap.” CQ Researcher 18.11 (2008): 241-264. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. “Domestic Poverty.” CQ Researcher 17.31 (2007): 721-744. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. Cooper, Mary H. “The Working Poor.” CQ Researcher 5.41 (1995): 969-992. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008 “Income Inequality.” CQ Researcher 8.15 (1998): 337-360. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008
• Glazer, Sarah. “Welfare Reform.” CQ Researcher 11.27 (2001):601-632. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Elisabeth Sturn Library, Reno, NV. 5 Nov. 2008 Berstein, Aoron. 2007. “‘Women’s Pay: Why the Gap Remains A Chasm.” Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. Ed. Paula S. Rothenberg. NJ: Worth. 370-372. Mantsios, Gregory. 2007. “‘Media Magic: Making Class Invisible.’” Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. Paula S.Rothenberg. New Jersey: Worth. 636-643. Ropers, H. Richard. 1991. Persistent Poverty, New York: Plenum. Rothenberg, Paula S. (Ed.). 2007. The Wage Gap And Its Costs. Race, Class, And Gender in The United States. NJ: Worth. 373-378.

The group consisted of two priests, a nun, a publisher, and a director. For me as a Muslim, it was the first time I had seen Franciscan monks in their habits, a long, hooded, brown robe, tied at the waist with a white cord, and with large concealed pockets in the arms. I thought they were wearing them simply because they wanted to make everything in the documentary appear as if it were in the Middle Ages, but, no, it was their everyday attire, and they wore their habits all the time we were together.

It was a noteworthy mission that merged from different parts of the US (Texas, California, Ohio) in order to set out on a tiring journey passing through Istanbul, Urfa, Damascus, Cairo, and Damietta, meet lots of people, and visit a great number of places. The project was named the Damietta Project, Damietta being the city where St. Francis of Assisi (d. 1226), the founder of the Franciscan order, met the Muslim sultan in the heat of war in 1219. I learned that it was a very cordial encounter between St. Francis and Sultan Al-Kamil, and the monks hoped that their documentary would serve to build a peaceful world by presenting a model from eight hundred years ago.

John, the publisher in the group, presented to me as a gift a copy of this book by George Dardess. This is why I am referring to this group and their project, for their philosophy resonates in the core message of the book.

Due to the limited space available, I will not give a comprehensive review of the book, for almost every argument carries baggage, and a fair review would entail a lengthy analysis. I will briefly touch on some aspects of the first part of this book, which I believe is an effort by the Franciscan order to help remove interfaith misunderstandings. In this respect, the author, who is a member of both the Muslim-Catholic Alliance and the Commission on Muslim-Christian Relations in Rochester, is the right author, and this makes the book worth reading. The opening prayer given in the introduction indicates the sincere efforts of the author, and thus of the group, to be revealed in the later pages:

God, creator of us all, master of the universe,

we ask you to be present with us

as we search to know you

not only in our own sacred scripture

but also in that of our Muslim sisters and brothers.

help us forget past quarrels

as well as present fears and suspicions.

Help us instead to keep our minds open,

our spirits free,

and our hearts joyful

as we ponder:

whether the god we both worship

is you.

amen.

Praising the Nostra Aetate (Declaration on the Relationship of the Church to Non-Christian Religions) of the Second Vatican Council, Dardess points to a great achievement on the side of the Christian world, as they managed to move away from Dante’s inauspicious depiction of the Prophet in The Divine Comedy, to acceptance of Muslims as worshipping the same God as Christians. Although this step toward dialogue received relatively little elaboration in the Council documents, it was still a positive effort. Nevertheless, this fragile step was threatened after 9/11, which makes books such as this one invaluable contributions to eliminating misconceptions about Islam.

The author’s intention in writing this book is summarized in his willingness to worship together with all humanity, as one family: “If we . . . come to the understanding that we do indeed worship . . . the same God, we can find ways of praying to that God together without violating our significant differences” (p. 6). The author does not deny the fact that it is not easy pass the stumbling block of the Christian attribution of divinity to Jesus versus the Muslim belief that he was not divine, but he argues that the purpose of this book is “to open up the possibility of [such] enrichment, even at the point when dialogue seems impossible” (p. 26).

The author does not skip over details such as the word “Allah,” which is perceived by some non-Muslims as some kind of god for Muslims, like an idol. Dardess carefully notes that “Allah” is not a special name peculiar to Islam but simply the Arabic word for God. Many Christians in the West are not aware that their co-religionists in the Middle East use the word Allah for God, as well. Dardess underlines the fact that God of Islam is not a God of wrath: “… the Muslim approaches God, not in abject fear, but in the profoundest gratitude” (p. 18).

The author lays down a very objective historical background to Islam for novice readers who have a superficial knowledge of its history, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and the Holy Qur’an. In this section, Dardess carefully notes that “honest dialogue depends upon having enough confidence in our own religious identity to be able to explore the religious identity of others without tension or defensiveness” (p. 30). In the comparison he makes between the Christian Eucharist and Islam’s holy book, the Qur’an, he states a principle, which is essential in true dialogue: “only lovers understand other lovers” (p. 30).

Analyzing further Qur’anic language, the author rightfully underlines that “words like Jihad, Allah, Muslim and Islam have so lost connection [in English] with their original context that they have become more truly English words than Arabic ones. The words convey our own understanding of Islam, not the understanding of Muslims themselves” (p. 31). Dardess points out that it is more of a linguistic challenge than a doctrinal one for Christians to understand the Qur’an. Language differences are no doubt a barrier in any human context, but in the case of the Qur’an, a specific branch of scholarship, tafsir, has been developed since the advent of Islam, as a result of which a number of interpretations have been produced to help readers understand the universal message of the Qur’an, not only for non-Arabs but also for Arabic-speaking believers. Surface reading of the divine text-actually any text-is never a profound reading of it, and it might even be misleading at times. Besides, the emphasis on the preservation of the original text should never be underestimated, for not only in the case of the Qur’an but in all translation works, it is of the utmost significance to be able to refer to the true original text in its original language.

In the Middle Ages, when Muslims were the pioneers in science, their works were translated from Arabic into Latin for many centuries, and this resulted in the European Enlightenment, which, according to the author, is “humankind’s greatest achievement, the one against which [we] must measure all other civilizations” (p.31). This last statement is problematic in itself and needs to be addressed. Western perceptions of the East have been shaped largely within the framework Western social sciences have drawn. The dress sewn for the Western context does not fit the Muslim world and social movements therein; however, social analysts work on the same model in their efforts to understand the East. So, the author’s argument to “measure all civilizations against European Enlightenment” contradicts his overall positive approach to understanding Islam.

Nevertheless, the book is a significant contribution to the literature on interfaith dialogue despite some of the shortcomings pointed out above. However, as the author mentions in the introduction, “the discussion itself is more important than the answer.” Those non-Muslims who are curious about Islam will certainly benefit a lot from this book: What exactly do Muslims believe? How do those beliefs differ from their own? What do Muslims believe about Jesus? Mary? Satan? Creation? The Holy Spirit? Do we worship the same God? Guided discussion questions in each chapter encourage readers towards further reflection and dialogue.

With the full extent of its use not being understood at the time of its establishment, the project emerged mainly with the pharmaceutical mission to predict, detect, treat, and cure diseases that were caused by genetic anomalies by identifying the genetic information in the human organism.

The desire for such a project was something akin to, or even beyond, the desire to climb Mount Everest, for it aimed to find out something that was unknown at the time. In such fields of biology as cell biology, immunology, and neurology the specialists need genetic information from human organism. The genetic information that an individual organism inherits from its parents can open a door to answer the questions of how an individual develops, how long an individual will live, or how the various species on Earth have lived over many generations.

New developments followed one upon another with the emergence of the Human Genome Project. When the famous Scottish sheep, Dolly, was cloned in 1997, it still seemed to be theoretically impossible to clone a human being. American scientists cloned an ape named Tetra which shared 98 per cent of the same genetic information as human beings. Soon after this, the scientists began to suggest that that all that remained to be cloned was humans.

Dr. Richard Nicholson, the editor of the Bulletin of Medical Ethics, noted that there is no danger in cloning humans, as long as the techniques of doing so are kept under control. If a dictator, however, were to get hold of this information, they would be able to produce an army of genotypically identical soldiers.

The most exciting scientific study of recent years of the Genome Project is that it is trying to develop a complete gene map of an individual organism. According to scientists, a human body has between thirty thousand and fifty thousand genes. All genetic features identifying an individual are found in the gene sequences of the DNA molecules. Eye color, character traits, IQ, and all the illnesses a person may possibly develop are all hidden in the genes. The genome carries all the hereditary features that determine all of life’s diversity, determining whether an organism is human or another species, or ape; all living things have their own genomes. The human genome, which is the full complement of genetic material, and which resembles large tablets recording the history of ancient civilizations, is distributed among 23 sets of chromosomes. It is comprised of approximately three billion letters and is the biological record of our destiny.

Ethical, Legal, and Social Issues

In H. G. Wells’ classic novel The Island of Dr. Moreau (1896), Dr. Moreau conducts hybrid experiments on animals that result in twisted masses of flesh, half-man, half-animal. When the European Patent Office allowed the Australian company Amrad to obtain new embryos by combining human and animal cells, this led to a revival of genetic fears, more than a hundred years after the story of Dr Moreau was published. Not surprisingly, this event alarmed several civilian organizations, including Greenpeace. In a press statement made in Hamburg, Greenpeace drew attention to the fact that we might face “dangerous creatures” in the future that would be created from such techniques. Probably one of the most disturbing facts was that the patent did not disclose how these creatures were to be used. Greenpeace voiced opposition to this for the following reason: “A patent grants its owner the exclusive control over his/her invention. Therefore, patents on life fundamentally change our perception and understanding of living nature and our relationship towards it. Living organisms, which have been ‘created’ by industry and which can be patented cannot have a value of their own, since they are only considered an invention of human beings. Thus they can be exploited without any ethical concerns.”

According to the patent, the embryonic stem cells derived from humans, mice, birds, sheep, pigs, cattle, goats, or fish could be used. The patent covers a “method of producing a non-human chimeric animal” by mixing human and animal embryonic cells: human stem cells are integrated into animal embryos. As a result, the created chimeras are non-human, but they may contain human organs, body parts, nerve cells, and even human genetic codes.

Experts state that the system of producing chimeras is completely different from that of cloning and they drew attention to the risks involved. For example, a virus like the one that caused mad-cow disease could easily pass from one species to another.

The Media Joins the Issue

Thanks to the great interest people have shown in the future of genetic studies, we frequently come across news reports that deal with the topic. However, we would like to note that titles like “the homosexuality gene has been found” or “genetic solution to talkativeness discovered” infuriate genetic scientists. Dr Arnold Munnich says that media aims to raise interest by misinforming the public with subjects like “obesity gene” or “laziness gene”; they merely oversimplify the issue. Dr Munnich emphasizes that a gene means nothing by itself.

The Danger of Abuse

The researches who have worked toward improving gene technology have performed some good for humanity; this is without a doubt. However, there is the risk of abuse. The discoveries in this field may be worth a great deal financially; when we add the rivalry between companies and countries, it seems highly likely that legal bans and ethical rules will be ignored. Some people even object to all kinds of genetic research, not only their abuse. They say that the abuse of seemingly useful genetic technology practices in the future is possible, as has happened in other fields of technology; nuclear researches and laser technology also used to be innocent studies at the very beginning. But we cannot object to the use of electricity just because it is also used for executing people with electric chairs.

Governments and international organizations are quite sensitive to ensure that gene technology will only be used for the good of humanity. There are several international organizations interested in the ethical dimension of the issue. There are certain rules and regulations that establish the fundamental principles that will prevent the abuse of genetic studies, and protect the biodiversity and ecological balance. It is forbidden to carry out research on human cloning and altering human embryos. In the past, dictators like Adolf Hitler attempted to abuse gene technology in this respect. The ruthless Dr Joseph Mengele tried to clone his Fuhrer from the epitel cells he took from him.

Will Confidentiality be Respected?

Another concern brought about by new diagnosis methods and tests is that the principle of patient confidentiality, which has existed for centuries like a secret agreement between doctors and their patients, has begun to be debated, even violated. We usually talk about such “confidentiality” when the information is likely to be harmful for the patient if publicized. From this perspective, the results obtained by genetic tests can be evaluated as such. It is one of the duties of doctors to maintain patient confidentiality. On the other hand, if the relevant data is also likely to harm society, the hospital staff, and those around the patient, then the doctor can face a dilemma.

Some of the possible problems that may be faced due to the mapping of human genome will be that employers could be provided with forehand knowledge about the potential genetic diseases of applicants; they may know whether the person to be employed will be a future financial burden to the company if they carry such genetic risks as cancer or Parkinson’s. In this way new standards of employment will be developed. Even though systematical public surveys do not indicate any significant dangers at hand, it would be nearly impossible to stop rumors. Several people may be denied insurance if they have the genes for a fatal disease. Another may be dismissed from their job for the same reason. In the USA, it is illegal in 39 states to issue insurance policies according to genetic test results, and it is also illegal in 15 states to expel employees according to these. However, employers and insurance agents take advantage of the gaps in relevant laws and they secretly make use of genetic tests. According to research carried out in 1999, 30% of medium-sized or small businesses use such tests to promote and dismiss their employees.

Psychologically, it does not seem likely that people would consent to their status being determined by genetic tests. Would you really like to face your genetic disadvantages? A survey made with cooperation of Time magazine and CNN revealed that half of the participants did not want to know.

The Fate of an Unborn Baby

Deciphering the book of life unfortunately brings along ethical problems. The discovery of our genetic codes can also lead to other humans controlling the future of the human race. The critical question is “Can scientists produce human beings with the desired physical and mental qualities?” If so, genomic science may enable biologists to prepare a list of spare parts, parents may “order” a baby, and as altering our children or ourselves gets easier, we may be less tolerant against those who have not been altered. Lori Andrews of Kent University wonders if we were to be informed of mental defects, obesity, shortness or other undesired characteristics beforehand, whether the parents of those babies would still allow them to be born into a society that scorns such qualities. Even now, it is not uncommon to see some doctors and nurses criticize the parents of babies who are born with pre-detectable defects. If we assume that all parents have “ordered” babies, God knows what kind of a world we will have.

What Should the Aim of Such Practices Be?

Genetic studies should aim to prevent or treat illnesses, not to “enhance” genes. The opportunities offered by genetics should not be a mass elimination medium used by employers or a mechanism of spotting potential criminals in the hands of oppressive regimes. The Almighty One Who has been running the order of our universe so perfectly has granted us some keys to its mysteries. Why should we not do our best and use them for the good of humanity?

References

• Sasson, A., Biotechnologies in Developing Countries: Present end Future, UNESCO Publishing, Paris: 1993.
• McKusick, V.A., “First South-North Human Genome Conference”, Genomics 14, 1121-1123 (1992).
• Barnhart, B. J., “The department of energy (DOE) human genome initiative,” Genomics 5: 657-60,(1989).
• Ferguson-Smith, M. A., “European Approach to the Gene Project,” The Taseb J. 5:61-5 (1991).
• Malakoff, D., Service, R.F., Science, 16 Feb. 2001.
• Dulbecco, R., “The Italian genome project,” Genomics 9:404-5, (1991).
• McKusick, V. A., “Mapping and Sequencing the Human Genome,” J. Med. 320:910-15, New England: 1989.
• Murray, R.K. et al, Harper’s Biochemistry, Appleton & Lange, 1993.
• Neyzi, O., Ertugrul, T., Pediatri, Nobel T›p Kitabevi, Vol. II, Istanbul: 1993.
• Harrison’s Principles of Internal Medicine, International Edition.
• Nature Medicine, Vol. 7, No.4, Apr. 2001.
• Science, No.290, 1 Dec. 2000.
• Nature Reviews, Genetics, Jan. 2001.

Even though today’s viewers consider Frankenstein too pedestrian, viewers in 1931 found it so frightening and disgusting that Whale was criticized quite harshly. Earlier fantastic horror films that served as early examples of this genre, such as Frankenstein, Dracula, and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, were adaptations of literature and did not have much cinematographic merit.

In the 1930s, with the appearance of sound pictures, the movie industry could no longer remain indifferent to horror movies-especially the big success of Dracula, directed by Todd Browning and starring Bela Lugosi.

Up until World War II, many horror movies were released one after the other. As the war intensified, the genre’s theme shifted to psychological distress, and gradually toward European themes.

Violence and Blood

In England, near the end of 1950s, traditional horror films continued to be produced: Dracula, Revenge of Frankenstein, The Mummy, and The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll. However, the genre’s content changed somewhat. As color movies emerged, such movies as Paranoiac, Nightmare, Evil of Frankenstein, and Hysteria contained more violence, blood, massacres, and impalings, rather than fantastic themes. As viewer interest increased, the genre was accepted by the world’s leading cinema industries, including those in Asia, and horror films were shown around the world. In Italy, movies like the very successful The Mask of Satan acquired cult status.

Hollywood Begins To Rule

The American movie industry of the 1970s, the heart and soul of the global movie industry, gave considerable room to this genre, especially in the case of small-budget productions. However, the fantastic heroes of classical horror movies were replaced almost completely by exaggerated and “real” horror. Movie screens turned into pools of blood and depicted shoving needles into people’s eyes, cannibalism, dismembering bodies with chainsaws, and devil possession. Many movies had to be toned down before their release, among them Tobe Hooper’s The Exorcist (1973); David Cronenberg’s They Came From Within, The Parasite Murders, and Shivers (1975); John Carpenter’s Halloween (1978); and Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead (1983).

Additionally, movies like Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979) and Wes Craven’s A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) blended science fiction and horror or comedy and horror. More importantly, they were big hits with moviegoers.

In contemporary horror movies, which produce sequels proportional to the interest stirred, we observe harsh criticism of society and the system, as well as a blending of comedy and horror or an accentuation of metaphysics. In recent years, movies produced by Wes Craven and John Carpenter, whose names are now forever linked with this genre, were warmly welcomed by moviegoers.

Giovanni Scognamillo: “Horror” lost its credibility

In recent years, the horror genre has suffered several traumas. The main problems are its diminishing credibility and marketability concerns. Giovanni Scagnamillo, the famous Italian director, says: “We can assure horror movies a type of popular cinema. Despite this, many famous directors show interest in this genre. Undoubtedly, there are really bad horror productions of this type. We can even say that most of them are substandard, second class.

“However, there also are many unpromising movies in other genres. In my opinion, we should talk about the cinematographic value of the movies. As a pro of the horror genre, I am in favor of fantastic horror. It can cover more topics and different dimensions. You can do anything as long as you use your imagination. Other horror types have to confirm to specific restrictions. In horror movies, credibility is rather hard to find, because Hollywood is producing movies for a relatively young audience, regardless of budget. Grown-ups do not go to movies very often. Hence to attract young people, producers accentuate effects and go for the shock effect.” (Asik, 2)

A movie released on July 30, 1999, has overcome these problems via the newest form of media: the Internet. It also signals a new era in horror movie genre.

The Blair Witch Project

Two young men and a women go into the forests of Maryland to shoot a documentary. They end up filming The Blair Witch Legend, which has somehow survived until today. They interview area residents, talk to historians, and produce a documentary film by synthesizing the gathered data. Mysteriously, nothing is heard of them for a year. Then the following year, deep in the forest in which they were lost, their footage is found. In the scenes shot with one color and one black-and-white camera, their research and horrifying nights spent in the forest are recorded. This is a very brief summary of the movie. If you think you have a fine topic, a fascinating novel, and enough material to produce an impressive horror movie, all you have to do is create a proper fiction. This is what Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez, two university pals, did. Their movie, The Blair Witch Project, has already made $150 million in box office sales just in the United States. Another astounding aspect is that it cost only about $30,000 to make. After El Mariachi, which carried Robert Rodriguez to Hollywood in 1993 and cost only $7,000, The Blair Witch Project is another exemplar of a low-budget film becoming a box office success.

A Fake Documentary

The planning stage of The Blair Witch Project is as interesting as its theme. In 1992, two University of Central Florida (Orlando) students decide to shoot a documentary movie in a television-series style. They call their production a documentary, although most of it is made up. First, they devise The Blair Witch Legend and backdate it to 1785. The plot features a woman who, accused of witchcraft and sorcery, is left in the middle of a forest to die. To support their story, they fabricate historians, police, and townspeople, as well as some footage of the witch’s house, which was allegedly found later in the forest. When they relate their idea to a professor in the Theatrical Arts department, they are told it is “the most ridiculous and nonsensical project I’ve ever heard of,” and are shown the door. Ignoring this comment, in 1994 they send three young people to a desolate forest in Maryland with Hi-8 cameras. As the scenario necessitates, while they are going around the woods and shooting, more activity is brought to the movie by means of special messages received every morning in boxes. During the nights, the directors scare the actors by making strange noises. In six tiring days, they shoot 20 hours of raw film. Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez start working to make the material usable. They release the first version of the movie, which is 2.5 hours long, at the end of 1997.

The New Market: Virtual Environment

The film is now complete, yet there still is a problem: skyrocketing distribution and advertising costs. Besides, a box-office failure is not totally unlikely. To solve this problem, they come up with a brilliant idea: spreading the legend over the Internet. In 1998 the producers, who build a related Web-site, do something different from similar sites: They spread the legend to the masses instead of advertising the movie. After a television spot broadcast by the Independent Movie Channel, a fan circle begins to emerge. The number of interested people continues to increase, until it numbers in the millions. The famous Web-site, to which mostly young people are attracted, spreads among the public, who await the movie’s release with great curiosity.

Negative Criticisms

At the 1999 Sundance Film Festival, the movie receives harsh, mocking, sarcastic, and derisive criticism, especially from movie critics. After the festival, producers decide to budget $15 million for marketing and distribution. At this introductory stage, they put brochures about the movie inside books, make special programs for television channels, and arrange campaigns at school campuses. These efforts bear fruit, and the film enjoys great success in theaters. The Blair Witch Project, which was mocked at Sundance Film Festival and regarded as a nonsensical movie, is now accepted as a herald of a new era in the horror genre. Perhaps the reason for its success can best be explained by what Scognamillo talks about: its realism and documentary style, which gave it a great deal of credibility.

References

• Asik, Fatih. “Horror Genre.” Zaman, North American edition (27 September 1999).
• http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id=1800019506&cf=info
• http://www.blairwitch.com/2
• http://www.film.com/reviews/features/99blairwitch/