#medievaltwitter: Fake News, Documentary Sources, and Short-Form Writing Then and Now

These are remarks I prepared for a roundtable discussion on addressing modern topics in Medieval Studies classes held at the Inter-University Doctoral Consortium Medieval Studies Conference.

In the fall semester of 2016, I was teaching a CORE Cultures and Contexts course on medieval Spain. It happened that on the morning of November 9, I was slated to talk about the watershed year of 1391 which, following massacres and mass conversions, saw a sea change in the status of Jews in the Iberian Peninsula. The surprise result of the election and the next morning’s vandalism of a prayer space for Muslim students lent the campus a funerary air. In my experience here at NYU, a class on medieval Spain tends to attract two heritage populations: Muslim students and students from Spanish-speaking families. These students may be immigrants or the children of immigrants, they may be international students studying in New York from abroad, they may be third, fourth, or fifth generation Americans, they may be native English speakers or not, monolingual or linguistic polyglots. Despite the great diversity within these two student populations, one thing they have in common is that they belong to groups that had been the targets of hate speech, ridicule, threats, and fear-mongering throughout the election: the terrorists and the “bad hombres” of Donald Trump’s worldview. And the morning after we learned that this vision would be realized in the nation’s highest office, I had to ask my students, scared for their immediate safety and for their futures and shaken by the dystopian vision of what this place was quickly becoming, to care about the fourteenth century.

For those of you who are not immersed in the NYU undergraduate curriculum, our CORE program consists, in part, of three types of humanities courses: Cultures and Contexts, Texts and Ideas, and Expressive Culture. Students take a certain number of these and each section of each course is themed and taught by a member of faculty in a twice-weekly lecture format. These courses are designed for freshmen, although about half of our students delay completing this requirement until later in their career. For some, they are the only humanities classes they will take at NYU. For these reasons, one of my major goals in teaching in the CORE is that students use the literary materials from medieval Spain and the scholarship written on those materials to learn how to read critically and develop skills that will serve them as engaged and thoughtful citizens. As a goal for this particular type of class, this is even more important to me than anything they might learn about the Middle Ages per se. One of the episodes that comes up in the early weeks of this class is the ninth-century crisis of martyrdom provoked by Christians living in Arabic-speaking Córdoba; if my students can walk away from my class, log on to the New York Times and not assume, for example, that anyone who lives in an Arabic-speaking country is a Muslim, I consider that a success even if they forget the name of Paul Alvarus of Córdoba.

The days after the election presented an opportunity to challenge students to think critically about the kinds of rhetoric that had played a role in the campaign, within the framework of a medieval studies classroom. The most obvious form of writing to shape the discourse of the election was Donald Trump’s Twitter feed and the questions that it raised about audience, the mediation of text, and, in the form of fake news and Russian bots, forgery and reliability. Other parallel questions may be asked about tweets an medieval documentary sources with respect to genre, and with respect to the different kinds of impacts that different types of texts can have whether they are short or long, informal or formal, literary or documentary, or somewhere in between.  With Trump’s penchant for deleting and editing tweets possibly in contravention of the Presidential Records Act and the Library of Congress’ coetaneous announcement that it was not going to be able to archive all of the tweets that had ever been tweeted in spite of its initial plans to do so, it also invites questions about archival practice and about the serendipity of documentary survival. This is how I came to introduce Twitter into my medieval studies classroom as both a topic and a tool.

In the weeks running up to the election, the historian David Nirenberg gave an interview in which he recounted some of the experience of writing his first book, Communities of Violence. He described the extent to which he had become distanced from the very violence that marked the conflictive coexistence of the Jewish and Christian populations of northern Spain and southern France that was the subject of his book; he had come to think of the details as exaggerated strategies of rhetoric rather than records of the reactions of medieval people to the violence they endured in their communities. He comments:

“All the documents talked about this massacre, but none of them gave any numbers. I came to the conclusion that this probably was not a big massacre. It happened in a tiny town in the middle of the mountains. They probably were talking about it as a massacre in order to justify the fines on the populace… On my last day of research in this archive, I came across one scrap of 14th century paper which said that dozens of people—300 or so, I think—were killed in the village. It even described how some were dragged from under their beds, and how their throats were slit. I suddenly realized that I had constructed this explanation which minimized this event, even though the full extent of the terror was only visible on that one little piece of 14th century paper.”

Nirenberg then connected this experience to reading study showing that Twitter was contributing to the uptick of hate-speech in the United States. Again quoting from that interview:

“I felt this way when I was forwarded this Twitter study, that I had pooh-poohed the effects of a technology I don’t really understand, when in fact it may very well conceal something much larger… We should probably worry more about something like these tweets because we’re in a space in which the use of anti-Judaism as a way of fantasizing the perfection of the world is already becoming very powerful.”

In other words, on Novermber 9, 2016, I tried to help my students connect to the Middle Ages when their minds were preoccupied with life-and-death matters of the modern by asking them to assess the capacity of micro-short-form writing, whether medieval or modern, not only to capture the Zeitgeist but also to provide details that we find in no other type of source.

Teaching in the Wake of Trump

Last semester, I taught my freshman lecture course, Cultures and Contexts: Muslim Spain, on Mondays and Wednesdays. The morning after the election, virtually everyone present in the class — myself included — was out of our minds with grief. Many students did not attend that day and I instructed my teaching fellows not to take attendance or penalize absences. “If they’re not here,” I said to them, “it’s because they need to be somewhere else.” This was in line with directives that would ultimately come down from the official level at the college, encouraging faculty to take post-election dips in performance into account when calculating grades. Someone else was supposed to have lectured the morning after the  election, but had let me know late the week before that she wouldn’t be able to make it in the end; with one extra lecture to write, I looked at my schedule for the week, figured I’d watch election results with friends until 9 o’clock when Hillary would have it all wrapped up, and then go home and write. Of course that’s not what happened, and I ended up screening the medieval Islam section of Simon Schama’s The Story of the Jews in class on November 9. It was not my most stellar pedagogical move ever, but it was the best I could do that morning.

At that point in the semester, we were just up to a brief excursus into Christian Spain and France, looking at 1391 as a political and cultural turning point; and because of the nature of the material in the syllabus ringing with such obvious echoes of the hatred being directed first at Muslims, but also at Jews, in those last days of the campaign as throughout it, I thought that I had to address the election and its aftermath in some form.

I struggled over that weekend with how to do that. In a class of 72 mostly-anonymous students in a deeply divided country, I had to assume that some were Trump voters or supporters; and in fact, Islamophobic and anti-Semitic vandalism on campus in the following weeks would prove the audacity of the Trump supporters in our midst. I voted against George W. Bush in the first election I could, but I always hated it when my own college professors would make their political views, as aligned as they were with my own, a part of their teaching. Now that I am on the other side of the desk, I still believe in keeping political views out of the classroom; but at the same time, I think that opposing Trump is a moral choice and not wholly a political one. And for me and for my friends and colleagues who will be targets of a Trump administration and the neo-Nazi affiliates he is choosing to employ, opposing Trump is also an act of self-defense. Opposing those who would treat me as less American because I am Jewish is not a political act. Supporting unequivocally my students who will be treated as less American and perhaps even less human because they are of Mexican descent or African-American or Muslim is not a political act.

Ultimately, I decided to give a historiographic lecture about the materials through which we come to know about the events of 1391 and about how different forms of writing function in charged political circumstances. In particular, I built on the interview given by David Nirenberg in the runup to the election about how his understanding of the function of Twitter in political discourse was informed by his archival practice. This was all very easy to work into the class not only because of the content but also because of the students’ ongoing research essay project, in which I was very much emphasizing attention to genre — both of their sources and their own essays.

Archival practice was implicated in how I delivered the lecture, too. Normally I teach from notes, but since I was straying much further into contemporary issues than I normally do, and even though I did not consider my lecture that day to be a political one, I knew that a possibility existed of a student going to the dean to complain. So instead of lecturing from notes on that Monday after the morning after, I wrote out almost my entire lecture so that I could show the dean verbatim what I had said, were it to come to that. Since I had the whole thing written out, I had thought about posting it ablog, but couldn’t decide, in the end. But at this intersection of Twitter, history, hate, and the archives, with new questions being raised about the implication of Twitter in the destruction of presidential archives, I thought back to this lecture and thought it was time to share it. You’ll find it after the jump:

Continue reading “Teaching in the Wake of Trump”

Literature Dungeons and Dragons

About two-thirds of the way through my lecture class meeting on Wednesday, one of the students shouted out, loudly enough for the whole room to hear: “THIS IS JUST LIKE LITERATURE DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS!” Not all of the students were quite that enthusiastic about the day’s activity, but most of them got into it and I think that the activity that I will be calling Literature Dungeons and Dragons from here on out (it is medieval, after all), was a success.

Continue reading “Literature Dungeons and Dragons”

I Am No Prophet, and Here Is No Great Matter

I revised my syllabus for Muslim Spain: Literature and Society for this semester, the third time I am teaching the course, to spend a little bit more time at the start of the term setting out the foundations of Islam and Islamic history, in both anthropological and historical perspectives in the Arabian Peninsula and the eastern Mediterranean before following the remnants of the Umayyad caliphate west into Spain. In practical terms this means we set up the rise of Islam in the imperial context of the late antique world, spent a full class session on the rise and development of Islam during Muḥammad’s lifetime and the period of the rightly-guided caliphs (still a total whirlwind of a tour) and spent two sessions on the Qur’ān and the notion of a sacred and scriptural history shared between Muslims, Christians, and Jews.

In the course of introducing the Qur’ān, I borrowed an exercise pioneered by a grad-school friend and colleague whose work and teaching are much more immediately related to the development of the text, an exercise designed to illustrate to the students some of the kinds of textual issues that crop up in the oral transmission and subsequent editing of a work of scripture. In the exercise, two students act as prophets  who receive a message, other students act as scribes, and still others as redactors.

I let the students choose their roles and took the two “prophets” out into the hall with me, where I read them two stanzas of T.S. Eliot’s Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock; I chose the text because it is non-linear, has evocative imagery that draws upon existing religious traditions, and the rhythm of the poem strikes me as almost having the same effect for an Anglophone reader as saj’, the kind of rhymed prose in which the Qur’ān is written, might have for an Arabic reader.

Screen Shot 2016-02-09 at 11.46.46 AM
This is the PowerPoint slide that I projected at the end of the exercise so the students could compare their texts with what the “prophets” heard.

Each prophet recited the “revelation” to two individual scribes, who wrote down it down individually. In the meantime, the editors were answering some discussion questions on the reading they had done for that class; this way, they weren’t really hearing what the prophet was saying to the scribes, but they might catch snatches here and there, as though they were living in a society in which people were starting to talk about this new revelation.

The transcriptions from all four scribes; the two marked “1” heard the recitation from the same prophet, and the two marked “2” heard the recitation from the other prophet:

The scribes handed their copies to the editors in their group, who had to agree on a version; then the two groups of editors had to unite, compare their versions, and determine an authoritative version of the scripture.

The two groups’ edited versions:

And the authoritative written scripture:

final

We did not talk about what the theological implications of the specific text would be, although I love the image and resulting possible theologies of a deity, an Eternal Footman, riding on the coattails of the believers. I was surprised that neither of the prophets successfully transmitted the image of the poet’s bald head as John the Baptist’s to their flock; that’s one of the most evocative images for me in the entire poem.

What we did discuss were the textual transmission issues that the exercise raised, and the students had great observations and comments: One student commented on feeling a sense of responsibility to the hypothetical people in our scenario for whom our text would become a hypothetical scripture. Several students made great observations about the experience of writing down and editing that opened up a discussion of how texts come to be: One group of editors said that they thought that the way the had received the text from their scribes reminded them of beat poetry, and so when they had to make editorial decisions, they let their ideas about that form guide their choices; another editor handed me her scribe’s text with some annotations in red and asked me just to please ignore her marks on thee original copy, and so we talked about marginalia and annotations and the traces that readers leave in books.

I’m deeming it a success all around.

As a Medievalist I Can’t Help You. Maybe Nobody Can. (Or, what I’m not going to tell my students after Paris)

[[[I wrote this all out as I was thinking about what I would say this evening to the students in my honors seminar. They’re a group of forty students whom I see once every other week for an hour to guide them in research fundamentals, loosely structured around the theme of Jews, Christians, and Muslims in Spain then and now. Because of the theme of the course and because we will be traveling as a group to Europe next month, I thought I had to say something to them about Paris; but the group was too large and too unfamiliar just for an informal debrief-chat. So I had to put some though into what I was going to say to them rather than how I might guide a conversation.]]]

I want to start out by talking about gargoyles. Gargoyles are one of the most iconic kinds of medieval art, but most of the ones that are still on buildings today are from the nineteenth century; they’re replicas and new inventions from a period when there was a renewed interest in the Middle Ages in Europe, and they became a way for people to articulate their own concerns and ideas without really claiming them. They couched their deepest, darkest secrets in neo-medieval art. But make no mistake about it; these are the monsters of modernity.

Screen Shot 2015-11-17 at 8.06.28 PM

Amongst the gargoyles of Notre Dame are very few human figures, and the ones that are there represent the racialist theories of the nineteenth century. One of the few medieval scenes that remains includes a group of people rising from the dead at the Apocalypse, and one of those is a representation of a black man; it is one of the earliest representations that we have of a black person in European art. It is sympathetic and unremarkable: a black person amongst the dead that shall be raised.

By contrast, the single human form on façade of Notre Dame as it was restored in the nineteenth century is known as the wandering Jew. There is nothing monstrous about this representation, but it is telling that the only human amongst all the monsters is a member of a religious minority, racialized into monstrosity in the nineteenth century. This gargoyle is telling the story not of medieval Jews but of modern race theory.

An apochryphal legend is that the wandering Jew chimera bears the likeness of an especially hated foreman on the restoration project. It’s not true, but the tale foreshadows a complete reversal in the modern period.

Gargoyles require periodic restoration, and just as was done for Notre Dame 150 years ago, the façade of the cathedral in Lyon was more recently restored. Rather than being hated, the stonemason’s foreman at the building site was respected by all of the craftsmen for his reasonable expectations and his fairness. And so one of the stone masons decided to honor him by carving a gargoyle in his likeness and giving it his name, Ahmed, and his piety as a Muslim by carving the phrase “Allahu akbar,” God is great, into the base of the figure.

TO GO WITH FRENCH PAPER : "LYON: LA GARG

Perhaps predictably, local religious conservatives kicked up a storm, complaining about the Islamization of their cathedral. To its eternal credit, the local church administration spoke out in favor of Ahmed the Gargoyle, pointing out that like Muslims, Catholics also believe that God is great and are willing to attest to that in any language. Gargoyles and chimeras just are a neo-medieval form for people to express their opinions, good and bad, about the modern world.

https://twitter.com/Ayisha_Malik/status/665329076127850497

God is great is what the attackers shouted out in Paris this weekend as they gunned down people in the dozens. But it is also what French Muslims called out when they prayed that night for their country. And it is the sentiment, inscribed in Arabic at the base of the Lyonnais gargoyle. If gargoyles are expressions of modernity, Ahmed more than most hearkens back to the Middle Ages, when educated, literate people knew that they could read in many language, accept many truths, and hold many contradicting ideas — sic et non — with no problem. Arabic was no contradiction to Europe, and the greatness of one unitary God was mutually acceptable.

Obviously I am starting out today talking about Jewish and Muslim gargoyles in France because in a seminar on Jews, Christians, and Muslims in the country just next door, I didn’t think I could leave this weekend’s events unremarked.

Spain’s Islamic history is different than France’s. And in part because of that difference, I can assure you that our trip will be okay. Besides that, universities are risk-averse; NYU would not send us if there were any hint of danger. Our activities are being planned by people who live and work in Madrid and know lay of the city and its rhythms and are arranging everything with a safety-first attitude.

[[[That last bit is a lie. I reasonably suspect it will be fine but I am terrified all the same. I will tell them this lie over, and over, and over again until they believe it and I do. The flowers and the candles will protect us and we will not be cowed by men with guns. Trust me. I am the one with the advanced degree and the authority. Trust me; this lie must be true.]]

But just like the gargoyles of an imagined medieval France, a lot of observers take medieval Spain as a vessel through which to express their modern ideas, monstrous or marvelous. They see it as a place where Jews, Christians, and Muslims created a productive, coherent artistic and literary culture together and ask why it cannot be so today; or they see a place in which law and politics vacillated between protective and repressive and deadly and remark that given our joint historical past, today could be no other way.

photo 2.PNG

[[[This is the part that I’m not going to tell them:]]]

There’s a sense that the Middle Ages, and the Spanish Middle Ages in particular, ought to have something to say to us at moments like this.

As a medievalist I can’t help you; and in darker moments I think that maybe nobody can. I can give you a framework in which you can hang your own ideas and aspirations and vision of the world. Sometimes it’s valuable to be able to talk about modern issues from behind the safety of a medieval guise. But conversely, maybe it’s not any better to imagine a medieval world in which coexistence figured differently than it is to imagine a superhero multiverse in which a man of steel will catch you when you fall and vanquish the bad guys who pushed you into the chasm.

photo 1.PNG

I don’t have answers anymore; maybe I never did. A few months ago, in one of the Republican presidential candidate debates, Carly Fiorina said she was prepared to tackle the ISIS problem because her bachelor’s degree is in medieval history and philosophy. Everyone in my line of work laughed because the Middle Ages cannot fix a world irredeemably changed by the Enlightenment and the rise of the nation-state and the fraternal-twin ideologies of imperialism and colonialism. But it gives us something to do as the world crumbles around us and, more importantly, a way to do it.

[[[I will pick up again here.]]]

Most of you are not going to write your senior honors theses on a medieval topic; a lot of you are not going to write in a humanities discipline at all; but you are all heirs to the Middle Ages by virtue of being here in a university. The idea of gathering together to pursue higher education, to ask great questions, and to hold many contradictory ideas all at once and have that be okay is an invention of thirteenth-century Paris.

So let’s get on with going all medieval on your book review assignment, asking good questions and holding two contradictory opinions — sic et non — at the same time without exploding into a fit of modern clarity.

[[[In the end, I skipped the gargoyles and told them only the part that I thought I would not; that was the heart of the matter.]]]

10438169_10154287728702646_722754818237975399_n