Book Review Editor Research Articles

Editor’s Introduction

Eventful times for McCarthy scholars! In the midst of preparations for our June 2022 conference at Trinity College, Dublin, and our September 2022 conference in Savannah, Knopf announced in March that it will publish not one but two new McCarthy novels in October and November 2022—The Passenger and its companion novel, Stella Maris. McCarthy has been working on this project since at least 1980, and its publication has seemed imminent for a long time. (Writing in issue 1.1 of this journal way back in 2001, Dianne Luce mentioned waiting for the “new, New Orleans novel.”) McCarthy had new author photos taken in 2014 in anticipation of the novel’s completion . . . but it took just a little bit longer. And now, in 2022, that novel has become two novels that are finally about to be in the hands of an eager readership.In recognition of this exciting event, this issue of the Cormac McCarthy Journal publishes a number of interviews with and about McCarthy. First, internationally renowned author portrait photographer Beowulf Sheehan talks about the art of capturing images of writers, and what it was like to work with Cormac McCarthy in the summer of 2014 on the grounds of the Santa Fe Institute and in McCarthy’s home. Next, Dianne Luce and Zachary Turpin have gathered together a number of early, obscure interviews that McCarthy gave to Tennessee and Kentucky newspapers between the years of 1968 and 1980—several of these have been unknown even to scholars and disabuse the notion that McCarthy has always been deeply reluctant to grant interviews. Sheehan includes one of his photographs of McCarthy as well as one of himself with the author during their photo session, and many of the short newspaper interviews also ran with photos, some of which are included here.Continuing the issue are articles by Ian Gibson and Heath Wing. Gibson uses information about the composition of the Border Trilogy to illuminate the appearance of uncanny foreknowledge in the texts, and further to explore the supposedly contradictory influences of the scientific and the religious. Wing reads Blood Meridian as an allegory of the politics of sovereign power, focusing particularly on the relationship of the sovereign and his jester-fool. The issue concludes with Craig Warren’s review of the new anthology Approaches to Teaching the Works of Cormac McCarthy, co-edited by Stacey Peebles and Benjamin West.Finally, a bonus attraction! Lydia Cooper, longtime McCarthy scholar and book review editor of this journal, gives us a few first thoughts on The Passenger and Stella Maris. This issue had already gone to press when advance review copies became available, and so we had a classic “Stop the presses!” moment. As always, Lydia delivers in fine form, and kicks off a new conversation that will certainly be rich and ongoing for years to come. Many thanks to Amanda Urban for helping us secure the review copies.Enjoy, and keep in touch!Stacey Peebleswww.cormacmccarthysociety.com

The Editor’s Drawers

Dear Readers:We’re very happy to release our special issue “Black Laughs Matter,” which we announced two years ago in active support of AHSA’s statement of solidarity with #BlackLivesMatter. We are fortunate to have Darryl Dickson-Carr as guest editor. His work on Black satire, especially from the Harlem Renaissance to the contemporary period, is well known to scholars working in the fields of humor and African American rhetoric, literature, and culture. Darryl’s introductory essay will stake out the ground of our special issue, while I am sure that the six fine articles of “Black Laughs Matter” will capture your interest.Our next special issue (9.2, fall 2023) will focus on participation and humor—instances of interaction between performers and audiences, opportunities to establish affinity, or catalysts of activism, to name a few. Our guest editors for the issue are Michael Moser and Nele Sawallisch, two distinguished American studies scholars from Germany. So keep your eye out for what we’re confident will be another in a string of successful special issues. And if you have a topic to propose for a special issue, let us know.This issue also includes the debut of a new feature that we’re calling Spit Takes. The inaugural piece for this feature is Mike Reiss’s “The Algebra of Jokes.” Reiss has had a long and successful career in comedy, especially television comedy, having been a writer and showrunner for The Simpsons. His quick take in “The Algebra of Jokes” is full of witty insights about a particular genre of joke that requires the audience to work through the joke’s unspoken logic, and we expect you’ll find these remarks illuminating and entertaining. Truth be told, it was Reiss’s submission of this piece that prompted us to come up with the feature as a way to include it in our pages. Now our further hope is that others with professional experience in the production of humor will follow Reiss’s lead. Of course, the primary focus of StAH is still humor scholarship, but we’re always on the lookout for ways to engage our readers. And we’re hoping that Spit Takes will be a different way to spur your interest.Finally, our next issue of Studies in American Humor will be stewarded by a new editorial team. My five-year term as editor is up, as is Jim Caron’s tenure as senior associate editor. Working with Jim and associate editor David Gillota; book review editor Sabrina Fuchs Abrams; contributing editors Joanne Gilbert, Gretchen Martin, Bruce Michelson, and Jonathan Rossing; guest editors Jim Caron, Darryl Dickson-Carr, Marianne Kongerslev, and Judith Yaross Lee (twice); all of the authors whose fine articles, book reviews, and On Second Thought comments have appeared in our pages; and our sharp-eyed PSUP copyeditor MJ Devaney has been a very fulfilling experience.The fact that it has gone so well comes as a bit of a surprise to me. After agreeing to come on board, I had my reservations about whether I was up to the task. But the collaborative spirit that has been part of the editorial practice since Judith Lee’s tenure as editor, if not earlier, made for a very smooth transition. And we aim to continue that effective process as a new editorial team comes on board. In the interest of continuity, David Gillota will take the reins as editor. Given his great work as associate editor and as book review editor prior to that, moving him into the editor’s chair was an easy and sound decision. David’s exceptional organizational mastery has kept everything humming over the last five years. And our two new associate editors, Sabrina Fuchs Abrams and Gretchen Martin, also have years of experience in other StAH roles, so we’re expecting a seamless transition from issue 8.2 to issue 9.1. Christopher Gilbert will come on board as book review editor; his name should be familiar to our readers, given the frequency with which his work has appeared in our pages. And Todd Thompson and Heidi Hanrahan, who are no doubt well known to the AHSA community, will come on board as members of our contributing editor teams on “The Year’s Work” features.Last, I would be remiss not to acknowledge you, our readers. All of our work on StAH is done with you in mind. It’s been my pleasure to have had this relationship with you in print.Yr Obdt Svt,—LH

Welcome from the Editors

Welcome from the Editors

An Editorial Philosophy of Book Reviews.

An Editorial Philosophy of Book Reviews Travis Chi Wing Lau (bio) I have always had a strange attachment to the scholarly book review. It was one of the first forms of academic writing I learned to do in graduate school and one of the very first publication opportunities for me as a graduate student. In contrast to the argumentative, evidential peer-reviewed article, the review essay has always felt more "open" to me as a genre. By "open," I mean that the review essay does not bear the same obligations as an article which must pursue a singular set of ideas and arguments. Rather, the review essay invites unexpected connections with other works, ideas, traditions, and thinkers beyond the reviewed work itself. Contrary to literature reviews that open introductions to monographs or even individual book chapters or articles, academic book reviews invite responses to the work under review in ways that are not in service to a particular argument or scholarly project. Admittedly, this concept of "openness" came to me only after having learned how to write a book review through negation. I encountered so many formulaic book reviews that seemed to recycle a similar, linear formula: summary + praise + critique. While these reviews certainly get the job done in terms of signaling to potential readers what the work being reviewed might offer, they seldom achieve what I have found the strongest reviews model: how to enter into conversation with another scholar's work and how to contextualize that conversation within larger conversations in the field and in the profession. The ideal review, to me, is always dialogic in the generous spirit of inviting potential readers and interlocutors into a set of conversations catalyzed by the work being reviewed. In my experiences as a multiply marginalized scholar, so many of my interactions with editors have involved not only a gross mishandling of unprofessional and ungenerous peer reviews, but also a deep lack of transparency and self-awareness that has only shored up [End Page 243] an ongoing editorial gatekeeping that masquerades as rigor or prestige. While I do not mean to conflate different forms of review that coexist in the profession, my point is that the culture of review—how we talk about our own work and the work of others—is a direct product of the larger editorial culture in academe that remains deeply unregulated, untrained, and uncompensated, as well as perversely idiosyncratic to individual editors who can shape dominant practices (sometimes for decades). Because editors often step into these roles ill-prepared to do the always precarious and vulnerable work of supporting writers, they inadvertently reproduce this toxic culture among contributors, who are themselves potential editors and who come to see such toxicity and power play as integral to the work of editing. In my work now as Book Review Editor at Literature and Medicine, I find myself playing more of a pedagogical and facilitative role than a heavy-handed editorial one, which seldom helps reviewers understand my dialogic philosophy. Rather than dictating what the review needs to look like or where it needs to go, I spend most of my time inviting my reviewers to take ownership of their reviews, to see them as opportunities to critically appraise a work of scholarship in terms of its limits and affordances and to situate that work in relation to their areas of expertise or interest. True to the dialogic ideal I described earlier, I tend to ask many questions of reviewers in the feedback I provide them on earlier drafts: How does this work enable new forms of inquiry? How does this work model a particular methodological approach? How is this work indebted to others and how does it acknowledge that indebtedness? What has the work taught you and how might you apply the lessons of this work to your own scholarship? I have found that using open-ended questions helps to cultivate a conversational and self-reflexive ethos with reviewers who come to discover just how limiting the formulaic book review structure really is. Many new reviewers can feel intimidated by this arguably more demanding approach to reviewing, especially when they might feel inexperienced or unqualified to be responding...

2020 and Beyond.

2020 and Beyond Michael Blackie and MK Czerwiec (bio) When this issue goes to print, I will have been Executive Editor of Literature and Medicine for three years. My tenure began in January 2020, two months before lockdown. Although time during the pandemic's first year lacked clear punctuation, with days becoming weeks and weeks becoming months, it felt as if there was no time at all to pause and think deeply and purposefully about the work I was charged to do for a journal I have respected for decades. That feeling persists even now as I sit down to write this reflection. Unlike my predecessors, whose pieces cover specific time periods and who were able to look retrospectively on the volumes they shepherded to print, I find drawing such connections daunting for two reasons. First, I simply do not have the objectivity distance provides; I'm in the thick of it. Second, because I inherited most of the content that appeared in the first two volumes, it strikes me as inappropriate to reflect on its significance. In what follows, then, I recount the motivations behind the changes I made to the journal's structure and conclude by looking forward to the conversations I believe these changes make possible. Since taking this position, four new Associate Editors accepted my invitation to join Literature and Medicine's Advisory Board—Sari Altschuler, Juliet McMullin, Lorenzo Servitje, and Jaipreet Virdi. Travis Chi Wing Lau came on board as the new Book Review Editor, and MK Czerwiec became the journal's first Comics Editor. As leaders and defining voices in disability studies, graphic medicine, indigenous studies, community-engaged scholarship, technoculture, popular culture, and digital humanities, these scholars' work expands the board's already impressive reach and ensures it will continue to be in the vanguard of exploring representational and cultural practices concerning health care and the body. I introduced a new section, Front Matter, in the fall issue of my first year. Featuring critical reflective pieces on a particular theme, word, or object, Front Matter has thus far taken up Breathing, Protest, Mask, and Rubbish. These contributions intentionally depart from traditional [End Page 229] academic essays in style and genre, while still adhering to scholarly standards. They engage pressing issues relevant to health broadly defined, and are shorter in length, usually between 500 and 2,000 words long. Three realities motivated the decision to limit their length. The first concerned time. Because L&M is published semiannually, with one of its issues devoted to a theme, authors can wait up to two years before they see their accepted essays appear in print. Front Matter pieces are reviewed in house rather than being sent out for external peer review, a process that can drag on for months (I could write an essay-length lament on the pandemic's disruption of the peer review process). This expedited review process means the journal can now feature more work by more contributors each year. The second reality concerned attention. Readers increasingly find reading lengthy essays not directly related to their areas of research a formidable task. Though the pandemic's warping of time is partly to blame for our diminished attention spans, I suspect the true culprits are small screens and social media. (How many times, dear reader, have you looked at your smart phone while reading this reflection, or those of my predecessors?) By design, then, Front Matter pieces demand less of a time commitment from readers while still providing them with critical explorations of health-related topics they have come to expect from L&M. Ideally, these pieces will entice readers to commit to reading through longer essays they might not otherwise. The third reality that motivated me to launch Front Matter was the existence of a troubling and persistent lacuna. In an essay appearing in L&M in 2016, Olivia Banner called out "the historical neglect of African-American literature in seminal scholarship" published in this journal and the field of medical humanities more generally (28), and challenged both to address it.1 In late May of 2020, this neglect merged for me with the murder of George Floyd, the other defining event of that...

Editorial

In July 2022, at the EASA meetings in Belfast, we passed the baton to a new editorial team comprising Chief Editors Dimitra Kofti (Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Athens) and Isobel Rivoal (University of Paris, Nanterre) as well as Assistant Editor Ville Laakkone (Tampere University) and Book Review Editor Arne Harms (Max Plank Institute for Social Anthropology). The new team has started to process new submissions and will introduce itself in one the first editorials of 2023. We look forward to their contribution to this distinguished journal and wish them a felicitous term of office.

The Inside Rots Like the Outside Rots, Which Means I Grew Up in Northeast Ohio During the Last Days of the Republic

The Inside Rots Like the Outside Rots, Which Means I Grew Up in Northeast Ohio During the Last Days of the Republic Claudia Cortese (bio) The field sharpened into star shapes. I fisted the snowand pulled a raw hand from the hole. I wish I could say my healing is heroic. I wish I could say what he did to mewas egg-shaped and leaked yellow pus into his frying pans. Scars outlast pleasure, sing the men of Ohio. To find them,sniff the air for copper, for scabs, for factories closed three decades ago but which gifted their dioxinsto the groundwater. I wish I could say I hadn't wanted him dead. JK! The death wish was all teen me had. It tarred my intestines—each time I took a shit, hatred sludged the toilet rim bleach never touched. In 1997, my bestie Shauna called meon my clear phone exposing its wiry entrails and said He shot himself. My heart galloped with joy.Despite the economy of guilt that raised me, I felt no shame for my heart turned horse muscle. The geraniums diedwhen he took me to hell. Only a mother could save the spring but the question hung in the air. Would she save me or would she sayI never named it what you named it. Therefore, he never stole you. Once, I chugged three bottles of Boone's Strawberry Hilland woke, half-dead, in a frozen suburban lawn. Once, I spraypainted God fingered Jesus's asshole on St. Joan of Arc Elementary. Once, I atethe sluttiest lipstick I could find and Lisa Frank pink leaked [End Page 323] from my ass for weeks. If you think this poem is about rapeyou're right. I sketched the cheerleader I hated for no reason in my friend's yearbook, drew myself flying towards her.Super Claudia will tear your pussy out! I scribbled beneath her. What if instead of, There can be no poetry after Auschwitz, we say,There can be no poetry after family, after childhood, after we learn they won't save us. I knocked on the cheerleader's front door, cooedLet me in, little stick. To my shock, she said No. [End Page 324] Claudia Cortese Claudia Cortese's first full-length book, Wasp Queen (Black Lawrence Press, 2017), won Southern Illinois University's Devil's Kitchen Award for Emerging Poetry. Her work has appeared in The Adroit Journal, Bitch Magazine, Black Warrior Review, Blackbird, Gulf Coast, and The Offing, among others, and her poems have won awards from Baltimore Review, Mississippi Review, and RHINO Poetry. Cortese received a 2018 OUTstanding Faculty Ally of the Year certificate from the LGBTQ+ Center at Montclair State University and is the Book Reviews Editor for Muzzle Magazine. The daughter of immigrants, Cortese grew up in Ohio's Rust Belt and lives in New Jersey. A note on "The Inside Rots Like the Outside Rots, Which Means I Grew Up in Northeast Ohio During the Last Days of the Republic": "I wish I could say // my healing is heroic" is based on a Terrance Hayes line from the poem "American Sonnets for My Past and Future Assassins," which is in the book American Sonnets for My Past and Future Assassins (Penguin Books, 2018): "The deeper the wound, the more heroic / The healing" (45). Copyright © 2022-2023 Pleiades and Pleiades Press

Editor's Foreword.

Editor's Foreword Michael Blackie To celebrate Literature and Medicine's 40th anniversary, I asked four previous Executive Editors, all of whom remain actively involved with the journal, to reflect on their experiences. Anne Hudson Jones's piece, "Literature and Medicine: The First Decade," provides a detailed account of the journal's creation, what motivated the visionaries behind it, and the conversations it initiated. In "Literature and Medicine 2000–2007," Maura Spiegel and Rita Charon trace the journal's fundamental contribution to the emergence and development of illness narratives as a genre. And Catherine Belling reminds us in "Communicable (Literature and Medicine 2013–2018)" to pay attention to language, especially now that 2020 has shown us how connected culture is to biology. I also asked Book Review Editor Travis Chi Wing Lau, and Managing Editor Anna Fenton-Hathaway, to speak to their invaluable contributions to the journal's continuing success. Travis's piece, "An Editorial Philosophy of Book Reviews," reimagines the genre as conversations in which the work of caring becomes possible. And Anna's contribution, "Apprehensions of a Canon: Literature and Medicine 2013–2022," draws from nearly a decade of experience working with authors across disciplines. But it belies her importance to the journal—and to me. In the three years we have worked together, she has become a cherished colleague and an unflappable friend. My own piece, "2020 and Beyond," a collaboration of sorts with Comics Editor MK Czerwiec, outlines the changes I have made to the journal since becoming Executive Editor and looks ahead to the critical conversations about health and the body I would like to see Literature and Medicine become more active in. These reflective pieces appear in Front Matter. One final note. In her piece on the journal's beginnings, Anne recounts how Johns Hopkins University Press initially agreed to publish the journal provided its founding editors secured a guarantor to cover any production costs that exceeded the revenues it made. "The Institute for the Medical Humanities," where Anne built the field's first doctoral program, "at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston [End Page 201] agreed to sponsor the journal and guarantee payment of any financial shortfall."1 In 2020, thanks to the efforts of Anne and Catherine, the Press took complete ownership of the journal, thereby releasing Galveston of its financial obligations. This transfer is momentous. It validated the years of work the journal's Executive Editors, including Suzanne Poirier (1994–2000) and Charles Anderson (2007–2012), poured into this scholarly endeavor. My colleagues' reflections bear witness to the effort this achievement demanded of them and model for me what ensuring the journal's future requires. NOTES 1. See Jones, "Literature and Medicine," in this issue. BIBLIOGRAPHY Jones, Anne Hudson. "Literature and Medicine: The First Decade." Literature and Medicine 40, no. 2 (Fall 2022). Google Scholar Copyright © 2023 Johns Hopkins University Press

The book review column

My predecessor as book review editor, Bill Gasarch, held the post for 17 years. In his final column in January 2015, he said that that's longer than anyone should have the job. I count myself as lucky to have been nominated as his successor. At the time, Bill advised me not to stay on for more than 5 years. Well, here it is 6.5 years out and some 26 columns later, so it is high time for me to retire from the position.

Breaking into Print

This assignment aims to help nascent scholars break into print and develop scholarly connections between their own areas of interest and the subfield of rhetoric, composition, and writing studies (RC&WS). Drawing on advice from Ballif et al. (2008), students in my graduate seminar write a publication quality book review of a recently published monograph in RC&WS. After a series of priming activities, students engage in a structured peer review that follows guidelines I developed as book review editor at Composition Studies.

Introduction

Our term as editors of Global Environmental Politics comes to a close this year. It has been a privilege to serve the GEP community as editors of this flagship journal, to see the field develop in interesting ways, and to work with a wide range of authors doing amazing research. We thank everyone who served as a reviewer—without you, this process doesn’t work, and GEP is fortunate to have such a dedicated community supporting it. These thanks certainly extend to our wonderful editorial board, who do an enormous amount of reviewing in addition to providing excellent counsel to the editorial team. Our jobs were also made much easier because of the dedication of the associate editors and book review editor on that editorial team. Thank you, Aarti Gupta, Henrik Selin, D. G. Webster, Susan Park, Joanna Lewis, and Beth DeSombre, for all you’ve done. MIT Press continues to be an outstanding partner for the GEP community and journal. We very much appreciate the support it has provided during our editorship, especially around the transition to electronic publishing. Finally, this journal would not exist without the tireless dedication of our managing editor, Susan Altman. She is the glue that holds this all together. The whole GEP community owes her a debt of gratitude. We look forward to seeing GEP continue its excellent trajectory under the new editors, Susan Park, Henrik Selin, and D. G. Webster; associate editors Mark Axelrod, Joanna Lewis, Kate Neville, and Yixian Sun; and book review editor Beth DeSombre.

Generative Legacies: Rhetorical Historians on the Writing That Shaped Their Paths

I am delighted to share my last forum as JHR book reviews editor. Organizing these forums has been my favorite part of the work, and I hope that they’ve provided readers with useful insights and generative resources for scholarship and teaching.This final forum features seven rhetorical historians, each of whom completed their doctorate within the past five years, reflecting on the writing that most energizes, galvanizes, and sustains them today. Their stories are personal and scholarly, stock-taking and agenda-setting. Each is different, particular. Taken together, they reveal the ripple effects that any individual text can have as it circulates and is read. Each writer found solace and challenge in their reading. Each took up that solace and challenge in their subsequent work. We now pass them along to you, hoping that you will find resonance with the stories and hope in the generative legacies we each create with our own writing.

Cultural Politics Editorial Updates

Editorial| July 01 2022 Cultural Politics Editorial Updates Cultural Politics (2022) 18 (2): 117–118. https://doi.org/10.1215/17432197-9716182 Cite Icon Cite Share Icon Share Twitter Permissions Search Site Citation Cultural Politics Editorial Updates. Cultural Politics 1 July 2022; 18 (2): 117–118. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/17432197-9716182 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsCultural Politics Search Advanced Search Cultural Politics 18, no. 2, marks a revision of the lead editorial team of the journal, as well as changes to the arts editor, book reviews editor, and both editorial boards. The retirement of founding lead editor of the journal, John Armitage, without whom the journal would not exist, has marked a moment of reflection, revision, and reenvisioning of Cultural Politics. We are happy to add Eva Haifa Giraud to the lead editorial team. Similarly, with the retirement of arts editor Deborah Frizzell, who has been at the helm of the regular arts contributions to the journal, we welcome Tania Roy to this role. The art contributions to the journal constitute a hallmark of the journal, and we look forward to continuing and expanding their profile. With Eva shifting to co–lead editor, Luci Eldridge takes over as the book review editor. A glance at the masthead for this issue... You do not currently have access to this content.

Call for Submissions

The editors of Hungarian Studies Review are seeking proposals and submissions for the following types of manuscripts:The editors of HSR also welcome submissions beyond those outlined above, including project and conference reports, polemical scholarly debates, pedagogical discussions, and photo essays (subject to permissions). We also welcome proposals for special thematic issues.The journal provides copy-editing assistance to contributors, though we will return submissions to authors prior to consideration for publication if significant revisions are necessary. Please consult the Style Guide on the HSR webpage (https://www.psupress.org/Journals/jnls_HSR.html —click on “Submissions” and then on “Style Guide”) for details on how to format your submission.Send all proposals and inquiries to our managing editor, Leslie Waters: lwaters@utep.edu.Send all suggestions for books to review to the book review editor, Szabolcs László: szlaszlo@iu.edu.

Letter from the Book Review Editor

Letter from the Book Review Editor

Book Review Editor, Wendy L. Applequist

Book Review Editor, Wendy L. Applequist

Conscience and Controversy

Conscience and Controversy

Editorial

Editorial Ilham Nasser and Nuraan Davids Human development is about people, their interactions and dreams, as well as their beliefs, worldviews, and identities. It is also about the emotions and insights of being human, our sense of hope and fear, and our collective vulnerability as we continually strive to look for a better future. For some this means the right to be who they are, to live where they were born. For others, it means breaking from cycles of poverty and despair. Our privileges as the coeditors of this journal extend beyond access to an array of textual submissions from around the globe to a state of enrichment and hope in education. With each submission comes profound research endeavors toward new considerations and reimagined possibilities for those who are visible and invisible. Each submission confirms our belief in people's potential to transform their lives as individuals and groups. And to do so, we emphasize the intersection between human development and education as critical for improving lives, nourishing well-rounded individuals, and creating caring societies and communities. This issue takes a broad human development view on life, from the early years all the way to adulthood and death. More specifically we emphasize the legacy people leave behind when they dedicate their lives to improving the human development trajectory, especially in Muslim societies, as in the case of the late professor Dr. Abdul Hamid AbuSulayman, who left us toward the end of last year. In this issue we celebrate his life and accomplishments. This issue also is the first that includes articles prepared through a mentoring program that the editorial team initiated to support junior scholars whose English is not their academic language and to raise their voices through sharing their work in mainstream academic journals such as JEMS. We consider our mentoring program as a necessary enactment of our responsibility to human development. Too many voices are left silent, too many lives are unknown because of barriers, which are easily removable if we are prepared to step into the unknown. The editors determine the quality of the manuscripts submitted and select those that align with the journal's mission and areas of focus and share innovative and unique perspectives. This mentoring model empowers rising scholars to contribute their work and share it widely. Along with this, we have provided some guidelines including a detailed manual and a videorecording, prepared by [End Page 1] Anastasia Khawaja, to help scholars prepare their manuscripts for submission (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSuhiCczArM). This is part of our commitment to the human development theme, in general, and the scholarly exchanges needed to reform education and improve scientific inquiries in Muslim academic circles and research circles. We do continue our exploration of topics such as policy, pedagogy, and the best learning processes specific to Muslim youth and education. These as well as a discussion of educational approaches, such as a holistic curriculum and its manifestation in Islamic education, are critical for reform of education and for strengthening a sense of identity and belonging among Muslim educators and students in secondary and higher education. Questions such as how do we teach youth about coping mechanisms in conflict situations, and what are the impacts of learning modalities on young students, are of interest in this issue. We also keep searching for ways to advance high-quality studies and share them with our readership. This issue commemorates the late Dr. Abdul Hamid AbuSulayman, one of the founders of IIIT, by sharing a review of Dr. AbuSulayman's major scholarly contributions as a researcher and educator and by conducting an interview with Dr. Hisham Altalib, the President of IIIT and a close colleague of the late professor. In the special article, Professor Abdelaziz Berghout, the Dean of the International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization of the International Islamic University of Malaysia (IIUM), names AbuSulayman's books and major accomplishments, especially his work during the many years he spent at IIUM on enhancing the integration of Islamic revealed knowledge and human sciences and the Islamization of disciplines. In the interview, conducted by our book reviews editor, Alyaa Ebbiary, Dr. Altalib provides meaningful insights and a lot of history...

Reopening Muslim Minds: A Return to Reason, Freedom, and ToleranceHaifa Republic: A Democratic Future for Israel

Reopening Muslim Minds: A Return to Reason, Freedom, and ToleranceHaifa Republic: A Democratic Future for Israel

The Canadian Field-Naturalist welcomes our new Book Review Editor

The Canadian Field-Naturalist welcomes our new Book Review Editor