Islam novel wins for free speech 

The battle about whether to publish ”The Jewel of Medina,” a historical fiction novel depicting the prophet Mohammed’s marriage to a prepubescent girl, has opened a new and unusually clear front in the war between liberty and security.

Nuance is vital, but, in the sometimes ugly and often simplistic struggle between freedom of speech and wise restraint, there is one absolute that cannot be overlooked. To fearfully retreat from the free expression of informed thought is to surrender the right to any thought — or any freedom from fear.

Random House, the publisher that cancelled its publication deal out of “fear of a possible terrorist threat from extremist Muslims,” seems to have forgotten that essential lesson. Fortunately, controversy regarding the novel prodded other companies to scramble for the rights to a book that will now sell far more copies than it would have without the attempt at censorship.

New York Times columnist Stanley Fish argues that Random House is a business with every right to publish or decline any work and that such a business decision is not censorship. Legalistically and semantically, Fish is correct. But, he is morally and fundamentally wrong.

Random House cannot and should not be forced to publish a work if it concludes the literature would be bad for its bottom line or reputation — or for the world, as it might high-mindedly believe the case to be. 

Yet, the fact that this large and prestigious publisher of ideas believes it is dangerous to distribute a well-researched novel written to advance women’s empowerment and Arab-Western understanding is deeply troubling.

Freedom of speech and freedom of the press have helped Western society thrive the Enlightenment, and it is not coincidental that these are the first principles enshrined in the Bill of Rights. The framers knew first-hand the value of words to the government and society. From Common Sense to the Federalist Papers, the publication of controversial ideas had guided their decision-making, and so they prohibited government control of speech.

Requiring Random House to publish “The Jewel of Medina” would be as unconstitutional and counterproductive as forbidding its publication. The decision is the company’s. It should realize, however, that spreading author Sherry Jones’ message benefits the publisher and society.

The novel bears little resemblance to the intentionally offensive cartoon portrayals of Mohammed that sparked riots and deaths in 2006. Jones has written that “The Jewel of Medina” celebrates the life of Aisha, Mohammed’s favorite wife in the Koran. 

Aisha’s accomplishments and the love she and Mohammed shared should lead to respect and potentially to a better position for women in the Muslim world. For non-Muslims, the novel should lead to greater understanding of a maligned and caricatured religion.

To illustrate many Americans’ misunderstanding of Islam, look no further than their assumption that a book honoring Islam’s rich history would lead Muslims into senseless violence.

It is particularly galling that Random House’s stated rationale is not even a threat, but fear of a hypothetical future risk. 

It was not a radical from Saudi Arabia who objected to this novel, but an associate professor from the University of Texas at Austin. (The author of a scholarly account of Aisha’s life was asked to endorse the book, but instead complained that it “made fun of Muslims and their history” and started the process that cancelled the publishing contract.)

Granted, a radical segment of Islam harbors a violent hatred of the United States and its allies. This article appears on the anniversary of the tragic attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and it is right to do everything possible to avoid a similar atrocity.

Some terrorists might seize a fictional account of Mohammed as an excuse for their actions, but this respectful portrayal will not be what fuels radicals.

They are, instead, triggered by a culture that ignores love and gentleness like that displayed in the novel. They are stimulated by ignorance of Mohammed’s true message, on the part of Afghanis and Americans. 

Overall, Jones’ message should alleviate, not provoke, extreme reactions in the Middle East and the West.

When Aisha’s story reaches the United States this October, count it as a victory for both freedom and security.