Tragedi

Kehidupan menyisakan banyak kisah yang terus aja bergulir seiring dengan bergulirnya waktu. Demikian pula musibah, tak satupun manusia paham bagaimana alam bisa mengekspresikan dirinya dalam dua karakter, keindahan dan keganasan. Indahnya bibbir laut menyembunyikan misteri Tsunami yang mampu meluluhlantakkan kehidupan. Indahnya puncak merapi pun menyimpan keganasan letusan yang bisa menyipta banyak problema. Di manapun kita berpihak, maka dua watak alam akan selalu menggoreskan banyak kisah. Sisa kisah dan penggalan dongeng akan selalu terwariskan dari generasi ke generasi berikutnya. Ntah lah, apa yang bisa kita wariskan dalam bentuk narasi kehidupan kelak.

Curse of Holywood

Six sinister Hollywood curses

Wed Jul 14 04:42PM by Martin Howden

Unexplained deaths, mysterious accidents and spooky incidents - sounds like your average Hollywood horror film, right? But no, these sinister goings-on happened behind the camera rather than in front of it on these films.

Sinister, mere coincidence or just pure hokum? Decide for yourselves as we look at 6 (66) supposedly cursed films.

‘Poltergeist’

According to those working on the film, the ‘swimming pool full of skeletons’ scene actually had real corpses instead of fake ones (apparently it was to create real life tension for the actors).

Following this, a series of incidents - several of them tragic - involving those who worked on the production has led many to label ‘Poltergeist’ the most cursed franchise of all time.

Flickering lights on set and objects reportedly moving around by themselves were just for starters. 22-year-old actress Dominique Dunne was murdered by her boyfriend shortly after the film’s release, while 12-year-old Heather O’Rourke died of septic shock while filming the third ‘Poltergeist’ movie. Two other actors from the series also died around that time – which equals four actors in the franchise dying within six years of each other.

‘Superman’

The curse of ‘Superman’ is said to read as thus: “If you’re playing the strongest man on Earth, you will die or end up in the weakest position possible.”

Christopher Reeve was of course paralysed after a horse riding accident, and died nine years later from heart failure. George Reeves played the costumed superhero in the ‘50s TV series, but when his career stalled he shot himself dead.

Lee Quigley, who played an infant Superman in the 1978 movie, died from inhaling solvents when he was 14.

While Brandon Routh has survived the curse, it seems his career has also stalled since ‘Superman Returns’. (See also Dean Cain). And it’s not just those who play Superman that are said to he have been struck by the curse – Margot Kidder, Richard Pryor, stuntmen and injured riders on the ‘Superman: Ride of Steel’ theme park ride are also said to be victims of the hex.

No wonder Ashton Kutcher refused to play Superman because of the supposed curse.

‘The Exorcist’

Of all the life lessons you should learn, one essential one would be not to annoy the devil. Case in point – the ‘Exorcist’ movie.

Some family members of the actors died during the film's production, as did several crew members. Jack McGowen, who had filmed a small part in the movie, also died from a heart attack shortly after wrapping on the film. And there is also the humdinger that a set caught fire overnight when there was no one there. Other creepy on-set accidents spooked those who worked on the film so much that a real life priest performed a blessing on the set.

‘The Omen’

A series of accidents plagued the shoot of the classic 1976 horror. One incident featured lions attacking a guard a day after the film crew visited the zoo.

Actor Gregory Peck was flying to London when his plane was hit by lightning. Eight hours later, a plane carrying the screenwriter, David Seltzer, was also hit by lightning. A private jet, which was meant to carry some of the crew members, set off without them after the airline double booked. It was a lucky escape for the film crew, as the jet ended up crashing onto a road – killing all on board.

A stuntman who worked on the film performed an everyday stunt on another movie, but was hospitalised after he seemingly misjudged the jump. He later claimed he felt he had been pushed.

The most notorious incident, however, saw a special effects worker being involved in a car accident in Holland, which saw his female passenger beheaded.

As the story goes, after stumbling out of the wreckage, he saw a road sign, which read ‘Ommen, 66.6 km’.

‘Atuk’

Never heard of this comedy, which features an Eskimo trying to live in New York? That’s because it never got made, and with good reason.

The script was written in the ‘70s with one performer in mind – John Belushi. The funny man was preparing for the role when he tragically died from a drug overdose.

The role was then handed to Sam Kinison a few years later. After working on the film for half a day, Kinison demanded changes to the script and the movie was put on hold. He died two years later in a car crash.

John Candy was next in line for the part, and was in the process of reading the script when he died of a heart attack.

Undeterred, the filmmakers then offered the part to Chris Farley. Not only was Farley interested, but he also handed the script to Phil Hartman in the hope he would also work on the film with him. Both died soon after.

‘The Dark Knight’

It’s only been out for two years, but it’s already been named as another film that has been plagued by a curse.

There is of course the death of Heath Ledger from an accidental overdose, while Christian Bale was involved in several high-profile incidents – one involving his infamous ‘Terminator Salvation’ rant and the other seeing him arrested before the film’s premiere after a row with his mother and sister.

When Morgan Freeman was involved in a serious car accident, it led to many media outlets claiming there was a hex surrounding the movie.

Throw in the fact that a crew member died during one of the film’s action sequences, and we can speculate that this caped crusader may indeed be cursed.

Getting Married

What every couple should read before getting married

Telegraph

As the author of a seminal new book on relationships, Kate Figes knows better than anyone what's really going on in modern marriages – as well as the secrets behind the truly happy ones…

Kate Figes has, in the nicest possible way, made a career out of being a nosy parker. For her latest book, Couples: The Truth, she spent three years asking 120 people questions about love, about sex, about who does the washing-up and who pays the mortgage, about children, about infidelity, about living happily, and unhappily ever after.

Awkward questions, asked in the twinkliest way imaginable, are her speciality. (Though sometimes she gets an answer to an entirely different question. 'Many of the men assumed I was referring to their sex lives when I asked them how love had changed through their relationship,' she says.)

And now here is the 52-year-old author – who in the past has delved into other dark corners such as female bullying, and the alienation that can reside at the heart of motherhood – twinkling her way through an interview of her own, in a cosy north London kitchen, with the odd interruption from her GCSE-ridden younger daughter, Grace, and her blind dachshund, Rollo.

'What I was most surprised by when researching the book was, given this notion there is today that marriage is miserable, mundane, troubled, how many people do make it work,' she tells me. 'We are all doing much better than we give ourselves credit for. When you talk to people and listen to their stories most people want to make relationships work. We know in our heart of hearts they are good for us.'

Why then is there so much negativity, fear even, around the topic of modern marriage? 'We like to look at the disasters more than at happiness. Also you only tend to hear about other people's relationships once they have broken down. Very few people want to talk about what is going on inside their marriage. It is like the "glass shade" that EM Forster writes about that cuts off married couples from the world. Which means you have no way of judging whether what you are going through in your own marriage is normal, or abnormal, and what you should do about it. And so then all you ever see are the disasters. And you think, aahhh, divorce is some kind of car crash that is going to happen to you, but you have no real idea how to stop yourself from getting there.'

It seems paradoxical that the more fearful we become about marriage, and its failure, the more expensive our weddings become (now £18,500 on average). Yet Figes believes the two are connected. 'We need to put marriage on to a pedestal, to show that we value it, because we want to believe that love can last a lifetime. And many of us feel that if we spend enough on our wedding then maybe we can beat the odds on divorce. But also we love the traditions of the wedding day – even though many of them are not age-old but 20th century. And we believe that, by buying into these "old" traditions, we are getting married in the right way and increasing the odds on marriage lasting "like it used to".'

Figes, who has herself been happily married to Christoph, a teacher, for more than 20 years, and with whom she has two daughters, identifies the current period as one of almost elemental renegotiation between men and women, particularly in the sphere of cohabitation and parenting. She writes that 'couples are arguing their way, often ferociously, towards a more democratic fairness, compromised by the assumptions they have grown up with about how men and women should be as "husbands" and "wives".'

Yet, as she observes to me now, there remains 'this idea that love will just see you through, that you meet this person and that it is all going to be all right. There is very little discussion. I was surprised by the number of people who don't talk about basic things like whether or not you want children, or where you want to live. There is this notion with relationships that somehow you trust an external force – love, or the institution of marriage, or romance – to keep you together when it is the two of you that have to do it. All I wanted to do with the book was to say to people, "Take responsibility for your relationship."'

But can relationships skills really be learnt? 'If you take a heart disease metaphor we know you shouldn't eat too many saturated fats and that you should exercise to keep healthy, and I think you could say there are similar things in relationships.'

And what are those things? 'A sense of individual self and respect for the other person's sense of self. That is the number one thing, because from there everything else flourishes. The courtesies of daily life – good manners, tolerance, forgiveness, a sense of humour. Then there is the ability to talk when you are unhappy about something before it becomes too entrenched a resentment. To accept imperfections, to be realistic as to what a relationship can offer – not expecting it to make you secure, rich, happy. It can't do all those things – those things have to come from yourself. And finally, when you have difficult times, to learn from them.'

Figes has robust views on 'learning from' infidelity in particular. 'Couples betray each other in all sorts of ways. Why is it that a sexual thing is more of a betrayal than, you know, lying about the fact that you haven't been paying the mortgage? Infidelity is going to be the subject of my next book. Most people have affairs for complex relationship or personal reasons. It is not just necessarily that they are not getting enough sex in their marriage. If you address that then you have a chance to rebuild your relationship on a better footing. I think that from the research – the stuff I am looking at now for the new book – most people who do forgive affairs move on to something better as a result.'

In Couples she refers disapprovingly to how, from the 1970s onwards, agony aunts have become more likely to counsel not forgiving your husband for an affair. 'I think we have become more sanctimonious about it. There is a notion that because marriage is a relationship we perceive as being less stable, because the social sanctions seem fewer, less reliable to us, fidelity has become more of a symbol of trust and commitment.'

Has she experienced infidelity herself? 'No. I have been married for 21 years and, no, I have never wanted to, and so far as I know neither has my husband. But both of us had lots of sex before we got married; we had lots of other partners.' Her own marital challenges have been her struggles with undiagnosed postnatal depression – which prompted her to write Life After Birth – and a period when her husband Christoph was out of work for 18 months, 'a hugely challenging period for us both'.

Perhaps the biggest hurdle was to get married in the first place. Her mother, Eva Figes, the author of the feminist tract Patriarchal Attitudes, divorced her father when Kate was five, and never remarried. 'My parents made all the mistakes that couples made at that time, when divorce was rare. You don't want to enact the same things on your children as were enacted on you.'

She spent much of early adulthood in a series of destructive relationships and, while she says she consciously chose Christoph 'because he was completely unlike the people I'd had relationships with before … someone I could be content with', she only agreed to marriage at his insistence, and 'spent the first 10 years wondering when he was going to leave me'.

(Figes's only sibling, the historian Orlando Figes, was himself recently the subject of a gripping marital melodrama, when his wife stepped in to cover his tracks after he had been posting laudatory comments about his own books online, and derogatory ones about other historians. Figes tells me she can't comment for legal reasons.)

She moves on to one of her favourite themes, the importance of difference, of space, in a relationship. 'There is the idea in this confessional culture that you have to be everything to each other, so therefore we are very confused about where the borderline lies between being totally honest, and holding back. We don't know where that line lies. In fact, it is important to preserve your own separate sense of space. Your partner has no right to know everything in your head. The most successful relationships consist of two autonomous grown-ups who are able to be together, respect each other's autonomy, and be apart, and trust when they are apart that the foundations are still solid. It is a very unromantic notion in a way that you should be these two separate beings but that it is how it is more flexible.'

Figes says that the strongest marital structure is that of a triangle. 'We may be each other's most important person, but that does not mean we do not need anyone else.' That said, she tells me that she was struck, during her research interviews, 'by how many different ways there are of being a couple'.

She is particularly optimistic about the rise of the so-called 'peer marriage', in which the importance attached to work is similar, domestic responsibilities are fairly evenly split – though at 60-40 the woman is still doing the lion's share – and both partners have equal influence over key decisions.

'Research shows that when couples feel more equal, when they are able almost to replace each other, then they are happier. They are more invested in each other's emotional contentment. What's more, the whole stability of a relationship often depends upon how much a man is willing to accept his partner's influence.' So the sensible husband will let his wife get her own way? 'If a man wants to stay with his partner it is in his best interest to listen to what she wants and change. Women are more likely to end a relationship.'

Figes observes that most divorces are triggered by 'disappointment rather than irretrievable breakdown'. She quotes statistics that suggest it takes couples six years to go to counselling for a particular problem, by which time it is usually too late. Figes advises, 'At the first hint of trouble, such as that you are arguing badly, just go to someone who interprets what you are both saying, so you really understand each other.'

Do people give up too readily on marriage? 'There are people who do divorce too easily. It is a bit like moving house – you don't realise what you have lost until you have moved. Shared history and a shared understanding can matter hugely. But then the other side of the coin is that there are people who don't divorce who should. So there is that question of how unhappy do you have to be. Only you can work it out but at least try and go into it with your eyes open.'

Of course we, as a society, are much exercised by our see-sawing rates of marriage and divorce, and what they may say about us. Yet fascinatingly, Figes points out that prior to 1850 it was only the wealthy, prompted by dynastic and inheritance concerns more than anything, who chose to marry. 'Up until the end of the 19th century many more people cohabited in common-law unions than married, just as they are beginning to do today.'

What is more, the average length of the modern marriage – about 13 years – is the same as throughout much of history. According to the historian Lawrence Stone, it was only between 1920 and 1950 – 'when death rates of young adults had dropped precipitously and divorce had not yet taken on a major role' – that the average marriage lasted much longer.

So our collective sense of failure in marriage and personal relationships is based on a historical misapprehension? 'Yes. This has been instilled in us by the 1950s – it is amazing how powerful that decade and its values are. That ethos that we think has been with us for ever – men as the breadwinner, women at home – it wasn't like that in the past. Yet we think that is the norm, and that we are all betraying old values.'

What about the role of children in marriage? 'For my husband's parents, for that generation, the marriage came first and the children were second to it, and it has completely flipped. We now have control over when we have children, so you therefore have to justify that choice. But I also wonder how much we have replaced … your children are for ever … your husband may leave, and you can't trust that love in a marriage will last forever but you can trust that children will, or at least you think you can. I think women do that, they over-invest.'

The fact is, says Figes, that whatever happens to rates of marriage and divorce our commitment as human beings to commitment itself remains undiminished. 'These relationships matter to us as much as they ever did, in terms of support, care, community, love. And this is reflected in the industry of marital guidance and "How To" books. Where we haven't quite yet made the leap is to taking responsibility ourselves for everything, even divorce. People behave so badly: they will give all their money to solicitors rather than sort it out amicably. We have got to be much more grown-up: there is no reason why you can't separate sensibly when it has come to an end, however hurt you may be.'

Endearingly, for Figes herself, endings are the last thing on her mind. 'The thing which for me is incredibly life-affirming, and which I was reminded of through talking to people for the book, is how you have the chance to grow up again. Even if you had bad childhood experiences, as I did, if you go into your relationship with your eyes open you can be reborn, through the stability and nourishment and love that you get.'

Or as she puts it, with moving absolutism, in Couples: 'I can say with complete confidence that an intimate, committed relationship holds the power to heal old hurts.'

'Couples: The Truth' (Virago, £14.99), by Kate Figes, is available from Telegraph Books (books.telegraph.co.uk; 0844 871 1515;) at £12.99 plus £1.25 p&p

Read more Lifestyle news on the Telegraph.co.uk

Religious Concern

Can a Muslim say happy Christmas to his friends?

Such questions are at the heart of a debate between the forces of Islamic intolerance and a group of scholars touring Britain with a message of moderation

By Jerome Taylor

Thursday, 26 November 2009

REUTERS

Muslims circle the Kaaba inside the Grand Mosque in the holy city of Mecca after morning prayers before this year's Haj pilgrimage

a.. enlarge

Suheil Azam was sitting in a coffee shop in east London last month when one his friends began a debate on whether it was permissible under Islamic scripture for Muslims to wish their non-Muslim friends happy Christmas. As a 23-year-old professional who socialises widely, Mr Azam had never considered the possibility that someone in his community might frown upon him for going round to his neighbours at Christmas or partying during New Year. But his friend, who had become increasingly devout, was adamant that such behaviour was haram (forbidden).

"Personally I think he's wrong," explained Mr Azam. "But it's difficult to argue against him because all the information he gets is taken from the internet and it makes him sound very knowledgeable. "

Such a debate between two young British Muslims would have been almost unthinkable two decades ago. But today it is frequently the internet that young Muslims turn to when looking for spiritual advice. And what they find in cyberspace is often shockingly intolerant. "Do not congratulate [the unbeliever] on their festivals in any way whatsoever," warns one prominent site. "That implies approval of their festival and not denouncing them."

While the real world provides a vast array of interpretations from a variety of Islamic schools, more often than not it is the intolerant strands of Islam taught by Saudi Arabia's fundamentalist Wahabi scholars that dominate online. Backed by billions of petrodollars and an army of tech-savvy graduates who are more than capable of capturing the YouTube generation's imagination, the internet has long been a stronghold for the most intolerant forms of Islam. For those who wish to see the West's Muslim communities continue to integrate with their neighbours, the prevalence of such isolationist rhetoric is of great concern. Armed with quotes from Saudi scholars living thousands of miles away, a small number of angry young British Muslims are forgoing the inclusive Islam their parents were once taught in favour of an interpretation that encourages them to cut themselves off from mainstream society and view all non-Muslims with contempt.

But now, as the Hajj gets under way in Mecca, one of the world's oldest Islamic institutions has come to Britain to remind young Muslims who might be tempted by the Wahabi rhetoric that there is an alternative way to worship. Scholars from Al-Azhar in Cairo have been touring Britain's mosques to launch a new online book of fatwas (Islamic judgements) which directly challenge the Saudi way of thinking.

The second oldest university in the world, after China's Nanking University, Al-Azhar was generally seen as the foremost centre of learning in the Sunni world until Saudi Arabia began exporting its millenarian version of Islam en masse from the late 1970s. Critics have since accused Al-Azhar of being too close to the widely disliked Egyptian government, but it remains one of the few international schools of Islamic jurisprudence with enough historical clout to challenge Saudi Arabia's supremacy.

The 200-page book, entitled The Response, has been available in the Middle East in Arabic for two years but this is the first time a comprehensive list of some of the most commonly asked questions encountered by Al-Azhar's scholars has been available in English, and equally importantly, Urdu, the national language of Pakistan. The issues answered in the book range from whether the Earth revolves around the Sun (Sheikh Ibn Baaz, Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti during the 1990s, insisted that the Sun revolved around the Earth) to whether a Muslim is allowed to perform magic tricks (Wahabis forbid it).

After each question, the book's authors quote a fundamentalist fatwa and then offer their own, centrist alternative. In reply to whether Muslims can greet non-believers during their festivals, for instance, Al-Azhar's scholars write: "There is no harm in congratulating non-Muslims with whom you have a family relationship, or that are neighbours of yours." They then give examples from the Prophet Mohamed's life that showed his tolerance toward other religions.

Sheikh Abdel Fattah El Bezm, the Grand Mufti of Damascus, was one of two Al-Azhar trained scholars to tour the UK this week, visiting mosques in Birmingham and Manchester. An elderly cleric with a trimmed grey beard and warm eyes, the Islam he grew up with and went on to study was mainly concerned with creating a just world marked by kindness and lenience.

In an interview with The Independent, he was keen to avoid blaming the Saudis directly, but it was clear that Al-Azhar's scholars want to confront the hardliners' rhetoric. "This is not an argument between two countries, between Saudi Arabia or Al-Azhar," he said. "But we do want to show that there are many different schools of thought. A few decades ago people began to abuse Islam and abuse Muslims. They took Islam out of context; they used it for their own personal gain and it has come back to haunt us. We are now paying the price for that." Richard Gauvain, a British-born academic and a specialist in Islam who has taught at the American University of Cairo for the past seven years, translated The Response into English and says it is time moderate scholars caught up with the online mullahs. "To be honest this book should have been written 30 years ago," he said. "Its value lies in re-establishing Al-Azhar as the leading voice. It reaches out to the average guy on the street and reminds them that nuance and ambiguity have always been very much part of the Islamic tradition."

But will British Muslims listen to what Al-Azhar has to say? Earlier this year Al-Azhar launched an English language version of its famous Islamic Hotline. Commonly referred to as "Dial-a-Sheikh" in Egypt, the hotline was launched in 2000 and allowed ordinary Muslims from across the Middle East to phone Al-Azhar's scholars for Islamic advice. It has since received over two million calls from around the world but has had trouble gaining a foothold in the UK. Chérif Abdel Meguid, the phone line's rotund and bespectacled founder, was surprisingly candid about the limited success of the hotline in Britain: "Very few of our callers come from the UK at the moment," he admitted. "We launched it in April but we haven't followed it up with enough advertising yet. This week we've taken adverts out in some of the Urdu language British press so we hope to get more callers." Inayat Bunglawala, the Muslim Council of Britain's influential media secretary who recently founded his own group, Muslims4UK, believes the Egyptian institution' s reputation has suffered. "Educated Muslims look at Al-Azhar with respect because of its history as a beacon of learning but they are also very much aware that its reputation has dwindled in recent decades," he said. "Many now regard it as little more than an extension of the Egyptian government whose sheikhs are called upon to make pronouncements that are favourable to the Egyptian regime. "

But Muhammad Ali Musawi from the Quilliam Foundation, which was set up by former extremists who have abandoned their hardline rhetoric, believes even extremists will take note of Al-Azhar fatwas. "I think this is something that we should welcome," he said. "[Al-Azhar] is still a respected institution and people will listen to what it has to say.

"The big problem, as ever, is resources. The sort of money Al-Azhar has backing it cannot even begin to compare with what Saudi Arabia puts in to funding its Wahabi clerics. Unfortunately, young British Muslims rarely come across a scholar from Al-Azhar. But barely a week goes by without a Saudi institution sending over one of their clerics to preach in our universities or mosques."

Conflicting fatwas: Cairo vs Saudi Arabia

Q. Should a husband or wife stay in a marriage if their partner no longer prays?

* Fatwa from Sheikh Ibn al-Uthaymin (a prominent 20th-century Saudi scholar) By abandoning his or her prayers, a person leaves Islam. It is forbidden, therefore, for a Muslim to remain with a husband or a wife who no longer prays.

* Al-Azhar's fatwa With a single stroke of the pen, this fatwa declares a vast number of Muslims to be unbelievers. In fact, it means that millions of people are now no longer Muslims. We do not know why the authors are so keen to exclude crowds of Muslims from God's religion.

Q. Is free thought and faith a positive attribute?

* Sheikh Ibn al-Uthaymin Whoever argues that a person is entitled to complete freedom of faith is an unbeliever, guilty of the major sin of disbelief.

* Al-Azhar Allowing people freedom of faith does not mean that we consent to people forsaking their religion. However, we are dismayed by insistence on charging Muslims with acts of apostasy for the smallest of reasons.

Q. Is it wrong to say the Earth moves around the Sun?

* Sheikh Ibn Baaz (Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia 1993-99) "The person who maintains that the Sun does not move should be condemned to death after being called upon to repent, as his denials of the motion of the Sun constitute a denial of God's Word.

* Al-Azhar Matters which are not explicitly indicated in texts revealed by God should be referred to experts in these fields, such as astronomers. Such fatwas as this one sadly distorts the image of Islam worldwide.

Q. Is it allowed for a Muslim to live in a non-Muslim country?

* Sheikh Ibn Baaz It is illegal to live in such countries for work, trade or even for study, except when engaged in proselytising in the name of Islam.

* Al-Azhar It is a Muslim's duty, whether living within Muslim or non-Muslim communities, to benefit other members of those communities through teaching religion, calling for the good and opposing the bad.

Q. Are Muslims allowed to study secular law?

* The Permanent Committee for Islamic Research (Saudi Arabia's most senior school of Islamic jurisprudence) It is not permitted to teach secular law as a general course in higher education. This subject should be limited to specialists, who are able to show how secular law deviates from the truth [of Muslim law].

* Al-Azhar There is nothing wrong with studying secular law providing that one's study is guided by a legitimate interest, such as co-operating for the general good of society and fighting legal oppression.