Discussion:
Illustrated Qu'ran
(too old to reply)
David Amicus
2015-12-09 00:27:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I was wondering what people especially Muslims think about this contemporary illustrated Qu'ran?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/arts/design/30fink.html
Catherine Jefferson
2015-12-09 04:31:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Amicus
I was wondering what people especially Muslims think about this
contemporary illustrated Qu'ran?
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/arts/design/30fink.html
Many Muslims will be at very best highly uncomfortable with this
particular work of art. It violates some basic Muslims principles, one
of which is not to depict the prophets or holy people. Stricter schools
of Islam do not approve of any representational art.

It's a pity that the artist didn't learn from Islamic traditions of
calligraphy and bookmaking instead of following Western Christian
medieval manuscript traditions, as he clearly did. Don't get me wrong;
I *love* medieval manuscripts. (I also do some bookmaking as a hobby,
although I've never made a book that was holy to any religion.) The
best Islamic calligraphy is utterly breathtaking. *That* is the right
style for doing a copy of the Qur'an.
--
Catherine Jefferson <***@ergosphere.net>
Blog/Personal: http://www.ergosphere.net
Yusuf B Gursey
2015-12-09 20:46:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 6:40:04 AM UTC+2, Catherine Jefferson wro=
Post by Catherine Jefferson
Post by David Amicus
I was wondering what people especially Muslims think about this
contemporary illustrated Qu'ran?
Qur'an not Qu'ran.

It's not even a Qur'an codex as it contains no Arabic text. It's an interpr=
etation of the Qur'an as the article quotes the author as saying.

My take is that it has a frivolty about it. Islam just doesn't have that ty=
pe of pop culture which Christianity has had since medieval times. =20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
Post by David Amicus
=20
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/arts/design/30fink.html
=20
Many Muslims will be at very best highly uncomfortable with this
particular work of art. It violates some basic Muslims principles, one
of which is not to depict the prophets or holy people. Stricter schools
Illustrated versions of the "Stories of the Prophets" (qiSaS-ul-'anbiya:') =
genre are not uncommon, especially after the Mongol period. Usually the pro=
phets are depicted veiled, especially Muhammad, but there a few that fully =
represent even Muhammad, particularly those from Central Asia under the Tim=
urids. Some visual religious art is found in Iran and among the Alevis of T=
urkey. It's not a Sunni-Shia thing as the tradition started under the Timur=
ids who were Sunni.=20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
of Islam do not approve of any representational art.
=20
It's a pity that the artist didn't learn from Islamic traditions of
calligraphy and bookmaking instead of following Western Christian
medieval manuscript traditions, as he clearly did. Don't get me wrong;
I *love* medieval manuscripts. (I also do some bookmaking as a hobby,
although I've never made a book that was holy to any religion.) The
best Islamic calligraphy is utterly breathtaking. *That* is the right
style for doing a copy of the Qur'an.
Still, the codices are meant to be read so excessively elaborate calligraph=
y is usually avoided.
Post by Catherine Jefferson
=20
=20
--=20
Blog/Personal: http://www.ergosphere.net
David Amicus
2015-12-10 00:30:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 6:40:04 AM UTC+2, Catherine Jefferson wro=
Post by Catherine Jefferson
Post by David Amicus
I was wondering what people especially Muslims think about this
contemporary illustrated Qu'ran?
Qur'an not Qu'ran.
It's not even a Qur'an codex as it contains no Arabic text. It's an interpr=
etation of the Qur'an as the article quotes the author as saying.
My take is that it has a frivolty about it. Islam just doesn't have that ty=
pe of pop culture which Christianity has had since medieval times. =20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
Post by David Amicus
=20
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/arts/design/30fink.html
=20
Many Muslims will be at very best highly uncomfortable with this
particular work of art. It violates some basic Muslims principles, one
of which is not to depict the prophets or holy people. Stricter schools
Illustrated versions of the "Stories of the Prophets" (qiSaS-ul-'anbiya:') =
genre are not uncommon, especially after the Mongol period. Usually the pro=
phets are depicted veiled, especially Muhammad, but there a few that fully =
represent even Muhammad, particularly those from Central Asia under the Tim=
urids. Some visual religious art is found in Iran and among the Alevis of T=
urkey. It's not a Sunni-Shia thing as the tradition started under the Timur=
ids who were Sunni.=20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
of Islam do not approve of any representational art.
=20
It's a pity that the artist didn't learn from Islamic traditions of
calligraphy and bookmaking instead of following Western Christian
medieval manuscript traditions, as he clearly did. Don't get me wrong;
I *love* medieval manuscripts. (I also do some bookmaking as a hobby,
although I've never made a book that was holy to any religion.) The
best Islamic calligraphy is utterly breathtaking. *That* is the right
style for doing a copy of the Qur'an.
Still, the codices are meant to be read so excessively elaborate calligraph=
y is usually avoided.
Post by Catherine Jefferson
=20
=20
--=20
Blog/Personal: http://www.ergosphere.net
My apologies for the typo about Qur'an. Thanks for pointing that out.

I have no problem with the moderator correcting my spelling or grammar.

Is Koran an acceptable spelling? What about Mohammed?
Yusuf B Gursey
2015-12-10 07:57:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 12:50:03 PM UTC-8, Yusuf B Gursey wrote=
On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 6:40:04 AM UTC+2, Catherine Jefferson=
wro=3D
Post by Catherine Jefferson
Post by David Amicus
I was wondering what people especially Muslims think about this
contemporary illustrated Qu'ran?
=20
Qur'an not Qu'ran.
=20
It's not even a Qur'an codex as it contains no Arabic text. It's an int=
erpr=3D
etation of the Qur'an as the article quotes the author as saying.
=20
My take is that it has a frivolty about it. Islam just doesn't have tha=
t ty=3D
pe of pop culture which Christianity has had since medieval times. =3D2=
0
=20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
Post by David Amicus
=3D20
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/arts/design/30fink.html
=3D20
Many Muslims will be at very best highly uncomfortable with this
particular work of art. It violates some basic Muslims principles, o=
ne
Post by Catherine Jefferson
of which is not to depict the prophets or holy people. Stricter scho=
ols
=20
Illustrated versions of the "Stories of the Prophets" (qiSaS-ul-'anbiya=
:') =3D
genre are not uncommon, especially after the Mongol period. Usually the=
pro=3D
phets are depicted veiled, especially Muhammad, but there a few that fu=
lly =3D
represent even Muhammad, particularly those from Central Asia under the=
Tim=3D
urids. Some visual religious art is found in Iran and among the Alevis =
of T=3D
urkey. It's not a Sunni-Shia thing as the tradition started under the T=
imur=3D
ids who were Sunni.=3D20
=20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
of Islam do not approve of any representational art.
=3D20
It's a pity that the artist didn't learn from Islamic traditions of
calligraphy and bookmaking instead of following Western Christian
medieval manuscript traditions, as he clearly did. Don't get me wron=
g;
Post by Catherine Jefferson
I *love* medieval manuscripts. (I also do some bookmaking as a hobby=
,
Post by Catherine Jefferson
although I've never made a book that was holy to any religion.) The
best Islamic calligraphy is utterly breathtaking. *That* is the righ=
t
Post by Catherine Jefferson
style for doing a copy of the Qur'an.
=20
Still, the codices are meant to be read so excessively elaborate callig=
raph=3D
y is usually avoided.
=20
Post by Catherine Jefferson
=3D20
=3D20
--=3D20
Blog/Personal: http://www.ergosphere.net
=20
My apologies for the typo about Qur'an. Thanks for pointing that out.
=20
No need.
I have no problem with the moderator correcting my spelling or grammar.
=20
Is Koran an acceptable spelling? What about Mohammed?
They are OK for English, but Mohammed is out of fashion. These are the resu=
lt how they sounded from a chain of word of mouth to English speakers. Orie=
ntalists discovered that the origin of the letter <q> and the first letter =
of Arabic Qur'a:n are the same (ultimately both from Phoenician script). Ar=
abic and other Semitic languages have two k like sounds, the one written as=
q is pronounced from further back in the throat. Arabic has three basic vo=
wels /a/, /i/ and /u/ and it matters if they are long short, they all come =
in two lengths. But according to nearby consonants and the dialect they var=
y a little in actual speech. These variations are not shown in writting sin=
ce they do not affect the meaning of the word. If indicated there would hav=
e been confusion among Arabs speaking different dialects. Scholarly romaniz=
ations of Classical Arabic just stick to what is written. Modern journalist=
s or immigratipn officials or the like play it by ear based on spoken forms=
and the spelling conventions of different European languages. Turks have a=
fixed way of pronouncing Classical Arabic so in romanized Turkish these co=
nventions are adhered to.
Yusuf B Gursey
2015-12-11 02:47:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
Post by David Amicus
=3D20
My apologies for the typo about Qur'an. Thanks for pointing that out.
=3D20
=20
No need.
=20
Post by David Amicus
I have no problem with the moderator correcting my spelling or grammar.
=3D20
Is Koran an acceptable spelling? What about Mohammed?
=20
They are OK for English, but Mohammed is out of fashion. These are the=20
resu=3D
lt how they sounded from a chain of word of mouth to English speakers. Or=
ie=3D
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
ntalists discovered that the origin of the letter <q> and the first lette=
r =3D
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
of Arabic Qur'a:n are the same (ultimately both from Phoenician script).=
=20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
Ar=3D
abic and other Semitic languages have two k like sounds, the one written=
=20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
as=3D
q is pronounced from further back in the throat. Arabic has three basic=
=20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
vo=3D
wels /a/, /i/ and /u/ and it matters if they are long short, they all com=
e =3D
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
in two lengths. But according to nearby consonants and the dialect they=
=20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
var=3D
y a little in actual speech. These variations are not shown in writting=
=20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
sin=3D
ce they do not affect the meaning of the word. If indicated there would=
=20



The primary determinant is lip position. The vowels (or the signs for them)=
are named for the shape of the lips /a/ is called fatHa which means an ope=
ning (the mouth is opened). /i/ is called kasra which means a breaking or c=
racking. The lips are spread horizontally and opened slightly. /u/ is calle=
d Damma meaning bringing together, the lips are brought together forming a =
rounded aperature.

/a/ may sound like an open e as in get if the tongue is placed in a forwar=
d position. like in get or French e with a grave accent.

/i/ may sound like a closed e, French e with a acute accent if the lips ar=
e opened farther apart than usual. Some European languages have a narrower =
e sound than Arabic /i/, motivating them to use e for it. Egyptian Arabic s=
eems to have a more open /i/ than other Arabic dialects. Many Arabic dialec=
ts slightly retract the tongue for /i/ in the vicinity of certain consonant=
s, making it close to the sound represented by y in Slavic languages. This =
may be interpreted as e representing a schwa by Europeans. =20

/u/ may sound like a closed o as got if the aperature of the rounded lips =
is larger than usual.

Some European languages have a narrower u sound than Arabic. This would mot=
ivate them to use o. Also I think Egyptian Arabic gives a larger aperature =
for this vowel than most other dialects.

In Muhammad the tongue is indeed more retracted for the first /a/ than for =
the second. This is due to the type of h like sound for that for word in Ar=
abic. That is the motivation for writting Muhammed, as it is done in Turkis=
h.

These are the prnciple reasons for the various different Romanizations of A=
rabic vowels. For those trained in Qur'anic recitation the rules are more s=
tringent, admitting to less variety, and they are based on the detailed and=
remarkable studies (and the esthetic choices) of grammarians of Arabic (ma=
ny non-Arab) dating from the early centuries of Islam. For speakers in mode=
rn media using Standard Arabic the rules are more lax. =20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
hav=3D
e been confusion among Arabs speaking different dialects. Scholarly=20
romaniz=3D
ations of Classical Arabic just stick to what is written. Modern=20
journalist=3D
s or immigratipn officials or the like play it by ear based on spoken=20
forms=3D
and the spelling conventions of different European languages. Turks have=
a=3D
fixed way of pronouncing Classical Arabic so in romanized Turkish these=
=20
Post by Yusuf B Gursey
co=3D
nventions are adhered to.
Loading...