Naguib Mahfouz, 1911-2006

With the death of Naguib Mahfouz last Wednesday, the Middle East lost a cultural icon, and the world lost a prolific storyteller. In 1988, Mahfouz became the only writer to be awarded the Nobel prize for works in Arabic, cementing his reputation as the Arab world's preeminent novelist. In his native Egypt, people of all ages speak of Mahfouz with such affection one might think he was everyone's grandfather. And, in a sense, he was.

Mahfouz's writings are to Cairo what Woody Allen's movies are to New York: love letters to their author's hometown. Mahfouz chronicled the large-scale events of 20th-century Egypt--independence from the British, the rise of pan-Arab nationalism and Nasserist socialism, conflict and peace with Israel--through the eyes of the common man. His characters were members of the hustling and bustling Cairene middle class. Most notable among his 30-some novels are Midaq Alley and the Cairo Trilogy, which presented readers around the world with gripping vignettes of everyday life.

He was a devout Muslim, but first a patriot who saw Egypt not only as an Islamic civilization, but also as a product of its rich Pharaonic past. Though he shied away from politics, his outspokenness made him an unwitting political figure. His books were banned in many Arab countries in response to his vocal support for the Camp David Accords. And the controversy over his 1959 "heretical" novel, The Children of Gebelawi, prefigured Ayatollah Khomeini's fatwa against Salman Rushdie 30 years later.

Mahfouz's defense of Rushdie led an Islamic extremist to make an assassination attempt on the writer in 1994. During one of his weekly writer's salons at a local coffeehouse, a member of al-Jihad rushed in and stabbed the author in the neck. Though the attack left him with limited physical mobility, by all accounts his spry wit remained intact through his final days.

Preternaturally humble, Mahfouz believed that his abilities as a writer needed constant improvement. He once famously said that, "A writer must sit down to write every day, pick up his pen and write something, anything, on a piece of paper." We are fortunate that he took his own advice, leaving behind an ample collection of novels, short stories, and plays.

The Forces of Reaction

Yes, it's nearly summer's end, the leaves are beginning to turn, and even the Katrina retrospectives are less frequent these days. But surely readers will join THE SCRAPBOOK in registering horror at Linda Greenhouse's latest front-page revelation in the New York Times.

Did you know that, in the Year Anno Domini 2006, there are only seven female clerks (out of 37) for the coming Supreme Court term? To be sure, as Greenhouse notes, the retirement of Justice Sandra Day O'Connor reduced, by 50 percent, the quota--oops, the number--of women on the court, leaving poor Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg "all alone in my corner on the bench."

But last year at this time there were twice as many female clerks, which is bad enough since just under 50 percent of law school graduates are women. Co incidence? We think not. Even Justice David Souter, who believes "a mix is a wonderful thing," had to admit to the Times that he, too, has no incoming gals in his chambers, lamely explaining that he had "hired the top four applicants, who turned out to be men."

Any silver lining to this cloud? Only this: Once the court's consciousness is raised on the issue, thanks to Greenhouse and the Times, the nation's left-handed, redheaded, Seventh-Day Adventist, and gay law graduates will feel emboldened to stake their statistical claim for clerkships that (in Greenhouse's memorable words) pay "a modest $63,335 for [one] year of service."

Comes a Time

The Associated Press moved a big scoop on its wires August 31. Under the headline, "Pentagon Moves Toward Monitoring Media," reporter Matthew Perrone revealed: "The U.S. command in Baghdad is seeking bidders for a two-year, $20 million public relations contract that calls for monitoring the tone of Iraq news stories filed by U.S. and foreign media."

For a war in which many of the most important battles are fought on the airwaves and in English and Arabic- language media, such a plan might make sense. But the AP smelled something nefarious. "The program comes during what has appeared to be a White House effort, before the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, to take the offensive against critics at a time of doubt about the future of Iraq."

Well, okay. The program also "comes during" the first week of the NFL season, National Waffle Week, Pleasure-Your-Mate Month, International Enthusiasm Week, and Bald is Beautiful Days. And can it really be the case that this project is related to the fifth anniversary of 9/11? It's hard to see how. If proposals for the contract are due September 6, that leaves the White House with five days to sort and review the proposals; select and inform the winners; receive the translations and media analysis of coverage from the contractor; and use this new information in speeches, press releases, and maybe even TV and radio ads.

We think this is a story that "comes during" what has appeared to be a slow week for news.

Isn't It Rich?

Many commentators look foolish now that the State Department's Richard Armitage has been revealed as the source who told columnist Robert Novak that Bush critic Joe Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. But the New York Times's drama critic turned drama queen Frank Rich deserves special mention. On December 4, 2005, Rich authored a hysterical column about Bob Woodward, the Washington Post editor who had received a "leak" similar to the one Armitage slipped to Robert Novak. What did Woodward do to earn Rich's scorn? He downplayed the seriousness of the CIA/Plame leak scandal, noting that the facts of the case would render all of the media attention "laughable."

Rich wasn't buying. He mocked Woodward as a Bush toady: "The West Wing was merely gossiping idly about the guy, Mr. Woodward now says, in perhaps an unconscious echo of the Karl Rove defense strategy."

It turns out, of course, that Woodward was right. In fact, Woodward a year ago sounds a lot like Melanie Sloan today. Sloan is the lead attorney for the Wilsons in their civil suit against Dick Cheney, Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, and other unnamed Bush officials. National Review's Byron York asked her whether the Wilsons would include Armitage in their lawsuit now that he has been revealed as Novak's original source. No, said Sloan; "Armitage was just basically gossiping with Novak."

Rich, by the way, has a book coming out Sept. 19, subtly titled: The Greatest Story Ever Sold: The Decline of Truth from 9/11 to Katrina. According to a Booklist account of the polemic, "Rich maintains that Bush himself was behind the leak." Can't wait for the book tour.

Intelligence Limits

The New York Times reassured us a few days ago that "the consensus of the intelligence agencies is that Iran is still years away from building a nuclear weapon." That sent us back to our clip file. From the Washington Post, Aug. 11, 1991: "International inspectors ...unearthed one of the most important--and disturbing--finds of the post-Cold War era: a huge assembly line for the covert manufacture of equipment to make an Iraqi nuclear bomb. The location of the sophisticated, secret factory for manufacturing hundreds of uranium gas centrifuges was unknown to any foreign intelligence agency despite intense scrutiny and untouched by five weeks of severe aerial bombardment during the Gulf War that supposedly eviscerated the Iraqi nuclear project. As such, it is a monument to the world's ignorance about what a determined bomb-builder such as Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein can do."

Of course, as Newt Gingrich recently pointed out, Iran has more than one way to advance its nuclear ambitions: "When the intelligence community says Iran is 5 to 10 years away from a nuclear weapon, I ask: 'If North Korea were to ship them a nuke tomorrow, how close would they be then?'"