Scott Simon is one of America’s most admired writers and broadcasters. Every week, I make an appointment to listen to NPR’s Weekend Edition Saturday, which he hosts. I follow him on Twitter, along with a million others. So, when Simon writes, speaks or uses social media to convey what’s on his mind, I’m eager to be in the mix, and I have an appreciation for his respectful thoughts on topics that range from humor to serious matters.
Simon has already written eight books – from novels to memoirs – on a variety of subjects near and dear to him including baseball.
He’s an unabashed Chicago Cubs fan and loyalist and his enthusiasm for our National Pastime easily rubs off on others.
Last month, Simon’s recently-penned ninth book – a story he’s wanted to tell for years – was published by Little, Brown and Company. Sunnyside Plaza, a mystery aimed at young readers, is a “story of empowerment as a young woman decides to help solve a mystery of multiple suspicious deaths in her group home.”
A deft storyteller who can make you both laugh and cry, Simon wrote the mystery of Sunnyside Plaza from his own past. After all, when he was in his teens, Simon took a job in an assisted living facility in Chicago, where he worked with people who had developmental disabilities. He drew upon those experiences there in writing his new book.
“It was more formative in my life, I think, than most any war I’ve covered, any political campaign I’ve covered, any reportorial experience I’ve had,” Simon said in a recent NPR interview. He explained how “it really opened my eyes into seeing the world differently.”
NPR Weekend Edition Saturday host Scott Simon
Recently, my path crossed with Simon’s on his book tour, where he spoke about Sunnyside Plaza before an attentive audience at the American Library Association mid-winter conference in Philadelphia.
In describing the kinds of individuals he came across in the group home, Simon explained that there were “people who have joy and amazing ingenuity just to get through the day, people with great spirit who see past the superficial differences we often see. Once I saw past it, it opened my eyes. It taught something to me.”
On this particular day in Philadelphia and in interviews, Simon speaks about how his personal experiences of working in the group home shaped his thinking and writing about it. In his familiar, midwestern polite tone of voice, he says that he purposefully avoids using specific terms to describe the people living at Sunnyside Plaza because he doesn’t want to get tangled up in an issue of language. Instead, as he suggests, “I want readers to see them as people, not put a label on them at any point in the book.”
Since its publication, Sunnyside Plaza has drawn much critical praise, both in print reviews and from peers. For instance, The Wall Street Journal wrote: “A wise, humane book from NPR’s Scott Simon tells a mystery from the point of view of a 19-year-old resident of a group home for people with intellectual disabilities. Mr. Simon’s respect and affection on every page of this gentle mystery narrated by Sally Miyake, a 19-year-old resident of a group home.” Meanwhile, Jerry Spinnelli, the Newbery winning author of Maniac Magee and The Warden’s Daughter, says: “Sunnyside Plaza is a light in the shadows that illuminates the humanity in us all. It’s a book as special as its characters. A treasure.”
A question that Simon is often asked on his book tour centers on why he’s decided to leap from his role as a highly-respected journalist into writing novels. On his personal website, scottsimonbooks.com, he notes: “I wanted to challenge myself. And I thought I might have something to offer. I’ve been blessed with a rich reporting career that’s often veered between the imperative, like covering wars, and the inane, like learning how to tango (within the same week, I reported the war in Kosovo, and went swimming in Beverly Hills with Esther Williams). One refreshed my perspective for the other. So, I hope I can use my experiences to put details, feeling, and a certain humor into my fiction. And I hope I can apply some old reporting muscles to try to imagine new lives.”
Photo credits: Sunnyside Plaza dust cover courtesy of Amazon.com. Scott Simon photo courtesy of americanlibrariesmagazine.org.
This year marked the 50th anniversary of the U.S. Open tennis tournament in New York City. In celebrating its history, the U.S. Open also celebrated the legacy of Arthur Ashe with a special photo exhibit on the grounds of the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center, a new logo for Arthur Ashe Stadium, and a virtual reality experience that transported viewers to 1968 for a front row seat at Ashe’s triumph in winning the first U.S. Open men’s singles championship over Tom Okker.
When Ashe won, he made history as the first African-American man to win the U.S. Open. In 1975, he became the first black man to win Wimbledon, beating Jimmy Connors. Over time, we would remember Ashe – the Jackie Robinson of men’s tennis – not only as a champion of his sport, but also he became a civil rights and human rights champion. By the time this pioneering athlete died at age 49, he had become much larger than tennis.
Acclaimed civil rights historian Raymond Arsenault is the author of a new, relavatory biography, Arthur Ashe: A Life, which is a close look at his life that presents much evidence to suggest that he was not only a great player, he was an extraordinary human being.
I had the opportunity to meet Mr. Arsenault, the John Hope Franklin Professor of Southern History at the University of South Florida, on opening day of this year’s U.S. Open, during a book signing at the U.S. Open Bookstore by Court 13. I was most interested to learn firsthand from the author what inspired him to write such an extensive – and insightful – biography that was nine years in the making, included 26 chapters bookended by a prologue and epilogue, and featured more than 150 interviews. After all, there were many sides to Ashe: he was a human rights activist, a philanthropist, a broadcaster, a writer, a businessman and a celebrity.
Arthur, whom Arsenault referred to Ashe on a first-name basis throughout the biography, was also an exemplary role model – not perfect, but “he came remarkably close to living up to his professed ideals.”
Arthur Ashe was born in Richmond, Virginia, in 1943. By age 11, Ashe became one of the state’s most talented black tennis players. In spite of this barrier, in 1960, Ashe won the National Junior Indoor singles title, which led to a tennis scholarship at UCLA.
In 1963, Ashe became the first African-American to play for the U.S. Davis Cup team, and two years later he won the NCAA singles championship. In 1968, he won titles in both the U.S. Amateur and the first U.S. Open, and climbed to a No. 1 national ranking. After he turned professional in 1969, Ashe went on to capture two more Grand Slams, winning the Australian Open in 1970 and Wimbledon in 1975. He retired in 1980, then served four years as the U.S. Davis Cup team captain and was inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame in 1985.
It’s been 50 years since Ashe’s victory at the first U.S. Open and 25 years since his death. He would have turned 75 this past July had he lived. Thankfully, his legacy has never left us, and as I learned from my brief chat with the author, it’s a great time to revisit and dig deeper into Ashe’s life story – his joy of the game – from public courts prodigy to consummate professional to Grand Slam champion to civil rights and human rights activist.
Arthur Ashe
In a recent NPR interview, Arsenault called 1968 as a defining moment for Ashe – not just because he won the U.S. Open. “Sixty-eight really begins his life as the Arthur Ashe that we know,” said Arsenault. “He did great things before 1968, was one of the greatest players in the world already. But as a human being, as someone who transcended sports, it began in ‘68.”
A thinking man’s player, Ashe was shy and generally reticent into his mid-twenties. He showed a parallel behavior on and off the court – polite and respectful – both in victory and defeat. “Then,” said Arsenault, “he took a sharp turn toward activism in 1968 and never looked back.”
The year 1968, was filled with trauma and turbulence in America. There were the spring assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, the escalating tensions of the Vietnamese War could be seen on college campuses across the country, the Black Power movement was taking off and, soon, there would be police brutality in the streets outside the Democratic National Convention in Chicago.
Soon, Ashe became an activist off the tennis court – the premier public intellectual among American athletes of his time – speaking out about the responsibility black athletes, especially, had to their communities. After all, by the early ‘70s, he had become the world’s best-known black tennis players – and with his growing stature, he realized a responsibility to use his platform to help other black people.
“As the first black man to reach the upper echelon of a notoriously elitist and racially segregated sport,” Arsenault notes, “Ashe exhibited an extraordinary strength of character that eventually made him the most beloved and honored figure in tennis.”
Arsenault writes of Ashe, “He had both the opportunity and responsibility to use his talent and position for a higher purpose than fame or personal gain.”
According to Arsenault, Ashe was never an agitator. “He was very unemotional in his advocacy and his activism,” he said. “He was absolutely determined to have an impact on the broader world.”
As an athlete and an activist, Ashe’s passion off the tennis court was becoming outspoken about civil rights. He focused his attention on fighting apartheid in South Africa.
Ashe was never a threatening presence on or off the tennis court. Instead, as Arsenault described in his NPR interview, Ashe found other means for being seen and heard. “His personality was cool, a little removed. Very Obama-esque,” he said, comparing Ashe to former U.S. President Barack Obama. Ashe was loyal to a fault.
Author Raymond Arsenault signing my copy of Arthur Ashe: A Life.
From 1979 on, Ashe default with a serious heart condition, and underwent multiple surgeries and blood transfusions, one of which left him HIV-positive. In 1988, following the completion of a three-volume history of African-American athletes, Ashe was diagnosed with AIDS, a terminal condition that he revealed four years later.
“Withdrawal was never an option for a man who had long identified with civic and social responsibility,” Arsenault writes. “Ashe followed his conscience even when it meant putting his comfort – or even his life – at risk.”
In 1993, after devoting the last 10 months of his life to AIDS activism, the valiant and courageous Ashe died of AIDS at the age of 49. He showed us that life is a journey – not a destination.
Looking back at Ashe’s remarkable life, Arsenault writes, “Never complacent, he had a restless spirit and an ever-searching intellect. Ironically enough, all of this philosophical and experiential turmoil was expressed in a reasoned, deliberate style that became his personal trademark.””
Ashe was so calm and poised on the outside yet so driven and turbulent on the inside.
“Arthur Ashe suffered many defeats, including a cruel and untimely death,” Arsenault writes. “Yet he was undefeated in the realms that mattered most – heart, soul, integrity, and character. In this important sense, there is no shadow to darken his legacy. What remains is the radiance of a good and great man w hose inner light shines outward for all to see.”
For 1 hour and 37 minutes on a recent Sunday morning, I felt like I had gone back in time to the summer of 1980 and Sweden's Björn Borg was the top tennis player in the world, in pursuit of a record-breaking fifth Wimbledon gentlemen's singles championship. From 1974 to 1981, Borg dominated tennis, both on and off the court. He became the first male player in the Open Era to win 11 Grand Slam singles titles. He possessed a powerful forehand, perfected the two-fisted backhand, and was rigorously disciplined to a fault. On the other side of the net from the 24-year-old Borg was none other than John McEnroe, three years Borg's junior: young, American, talented, abrasive. When you think of Borg vs. McEnroe, you think of tennis, former rivals, best enemies. They were the antithesis of each other.
During a screening at the Cinema Club in Washington, D.C. on March 25, I watched Borg vs. McEnroe, which premiered in limited release in the U.S. last Friday. (It played last fall on the film festival circuit in Europe.) It is directed by Danish filmmaker Janus Metz with the screenplay provided by Swedish writer and director Ronnie Sandahl. Sverrir Gudnason is a dead ringer for Borg while Shia LaBeouf portrays McEnroe. Borg vs. McEnroe focuses on Borg's rise to prominence, starting from his youth through the 1980 Wimbledon Championships. We learn how Borg's coach, Lennart Bergelin (played brilliantly by Stellan Skarsgård), helps him to channel his competitive – obsessive – behavior off the court so that he can focus on his impulsive game on the court. Meanwhile, we also learn of McEnroe's complete obsession with Borg prior to their big Centre Court championship match. "Essentially, the movie implies that, despite appearances to the contrary, Borg and McEnroe were inwardly very similar – and different mainly in their behavior. What the drama suggests is that the pressure to maintain appearances, to keep his furies under control and channeled, exacted a very high emotional price on Borg," writes critic Richard Brody in The New Yorker.
"I'm just like everybody else ... I'm not a machine," says Borg, during a testy exchange with a reporter on the eve of his showdown with McEnroe.
Overall, I found Borg vs. McEnroe enjoyable. The fourth set, 34-point tie-break, during which McEnroe saved five match points, takes up nearly the final third of the film. It is at times very riveting and played to its full dramatic effect. The points are fast and so are the edits. While the film focuses on the "Fire and Ice" rivalry between the two future Hall of Fame players, I feel I learned a lot more about the complexity of Borg's character – think tightly strung perfectionist – than I did of McEnroe. However, seeing McEnroe's bad on-court behavior recreated – yelling at both the chair umpire and at pigeons, too – brought back memories for which he's forever remembered. "You cannot be serious!"
Borg vs. McEnroe is presented in both English and Swedish with subtitles. I highly recommend this film.
On Tuesday morning, I woke up to the headline "Mr. Trump and Spineless Republicans," at the top of The New York Times editorial page. In its opinion, The Times wrote: "Just when it seems that Donald Trump could not display more ignorance and bad judgment or less of a moral compass, he comes up with another ignominy or two. This weekend he denigrated the parents of a fallen American military hero and suggested that if elected he might recognize Russia's claims to Ukraine and end sanctions.
"Mr. Trump's divisive views helped him capture the Republican presidential nomination. And even as he creates a political whirlwind with each utterance, leading members of his own party haven't the spine to rescind their support. Sure, some have come out with strong criticisms, but none have gone far enough. Repudiation of his candidacy is the only principled response."
As the 2016 presidential campaign came into full focus following last week's historic nomination of Hillary Clinton as the first female to be nominated for president by a major political party, I have followed with great interest the fallout from Donald Trump's crude derision of the parents of Army Capt. Humayun Khan, a Muslim American who was awarded a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart after he was killed by a suicide bomber in Iraq in 2004. It's drawing around-the-clock attention by 24-hour cable news broadcasters like MSNBC, CNN and Fox News as well as making daily headlines in national newspapers like The New York Times and The Washington Post. In today's Times editorial, it called Trump's statements towards the fallen soldier's parents "deplorable and mystifying" and asked: "Why would a presidential candidate mock the parents of a soldier who died in combat?"
Khizr Khan, father of a deceased Muslim American soldier, offered Donald J. Trump his copy of the U.S. Constitution during a speech at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia last Thursday. Standing beside Mr. Khan is his wife, Ghazala, mother of the fallen soldier.
It is said that words, like eyes, are the windows into a person's soul. Last week, Captain Khan's father, Khizr Khan, along with his wife Ghazala Khan, standing by his side, were highly critical of Mr. Trump for proposing to ban Muslim immigration to the United States. In a speech to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia last Thursday, Mr. Khan accused Mr. Trump of having made no sacrifices for his country. He spoke moments before Mrs. Clinton formally accepted her party's nomination.
In a tribute to his fallen son, the 66-year-old Mr. Khan spoke passionately of his son's character, his faith, and his patriotism. In doing so, this Muslim American father's electrifying speech turned into a lesson in American citizenship. There was no denying that Mr. Khan was being sincere while showing his undivided loyalty to his country.
The elder Khan, an immigration lawyer with an advanced degree from Harvard Law School, became a United States citizen after he emigrated from Pakistan in 1980. You see, he came to America seeking a better life for his family. Along with his wife, the Khans raised three sons, the middle one who would become a hero in death. The Khan family resides in Charlottesville, Va.
Army captain Humayun Khan, 27, died while serving his country – the United States – in combat in Iraq on June 8, 2004. He became a victim of a suicide car bombing while trying to protect the other troops in his unit. In my research, I learned that Khan had graduated from the University of Virginia and had been accepted into law school. He wanted to follow in the footsteps of his father. However, he deferred his admission to serve our country before continuing his education.
In speaking to the DNC audience – and by extension to a worldwide audience – Khizr Khan "gave a voice to Muslim Americans outraged by the anti-Muslim pronouncements of the Republican nominee for president, Donald J. Trump," wrote The New York Times.
It should come as no surprise that Mr. Trump's call for restrictions on Muslims entering the U.S. is acutely personal for Mr. Khan. And, it's something that has become a recurring talking point between me and many of my Muslim Facebook friends, most whom reside in Tunisia. They are puzzled by what is going on in the U.S. While most of them realize that Trump's sentiments are not shared by most Americans – including me – and goes against the ideals and values that have helped shape my country's democracy, they are shocked and disturbed that Mr. Trump could be calling for a blanket restriction on Muslim immigration – solely on the basis on religious grounds.
In December, Mr. Trump called for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on."
In speaking about his deceased son with his wife standing his side, the bereaved Mr. Khan said during his speech: "If it was up to Donald Trump, he never would have been in America." Under Trump's proposed policies, the younger Khan would have never served his country because he and his family would have been barred from entering the United States.
The elder Khan said Mr. Trump "wants to build walls and ban us from this country."
"Have you ever been to Arlington Cemetery?" Mr. Khan asked Mr. Trump. "Go look at the graves of brave patriots who died defending the United States of America. You will see all faiths, genders and ethnicities. You have sacrificed nothing and no one."
Mr. Khan's remarks reverberated inside and beyond the Wells Fargo Arena where he spoke to an attentive DNC audience. Then, the moment that turned Mr. Khan into a social media phenomenon – and has been shown countless number of times on TV over the past few days – happened. Staring unwaveringly at the television camera, he passionately spoke: "Let me ask you: Have you even read the United States Constitution?" said Mr. Khan. "I will gladly lend you my copy." Addressing Mr. Trump directly (which the intolerant Trump later called "a vicious attack" in a series of tweets), he pulled out a pocket-sized copy of the Constitution from his coat pocket and waved it for the entire world to see. It was the emotional moment of the convention.
Mr. Khan's speech was one of the most stirring speeches I've ever heard or watched. It was heartfelt and passionate. My eyes welled with tears and I applauded several times. I'm sure I was not alone in expressing these feelings.
Beginning Saturday, Mr. Trump belittled the Khans. He implied that Mrs. Khan did not speak at the convention because her religion did not allow it, and he equated his "sacrifices" as a businessman to those of the grieving Gold Star parents. What Mr. Trump failed to realize is that he could not sacrifice without serving. "With his implication that the soldier's mother had not spoken because of female subservience expected in some traditional strains of Islam, his comments also inflamed his hostilities with American Muslims," wrote The New York Times.
"If you look at his wife, she was standing there," Trump said, in an interview with ABC News. "She had nothing to say. She probably, maybe she wasn't allowed to have anything to say. You tell me."
The Washington Post wrote: "Trump described (Mr.) Khan as 'very emotional' and said he 'probably looked like a nice guy to me' – then accused him of being controlled by the Clinton campaign."
Trump's response stirred outrage among critics who said the episode once again proves that Trump lacks the compassion and temperament to be president.
Over the weekend, Ezra Klein, a columnist for Vox.com, wrote: "Trump listened to a speech by the bereaved father of a fallen Muslim soldier and used it to slander the fallen soldier's family. That was his response. That is his character. ... This is the gauge of his cruelty." He called the slander "horrifying" – even for Trump. Then Klein asked: "Just what kind of person is Donald Trump? What kind of person says these things? And is that really the kind of person we want to be president?"
"There's only one way to talk about Gold Star parents: with honor and respect," Ohio governor John Kasich, a Republican Party primary rival of Mr. Trump's, wrote on Twitter, using the term for surviving family members of those who died in war. His sentiments have been echoed by many politicians.
During an interview with MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell, the first of many the Khans have granted, which aired Friday night, Mrs. Khan broke down sobbing as she spoke about her son. It suggested to me – and I'm sure others – that Mrs. Khan let her husband give the convention speech for one simple reason: even though it's been 12 years since her son's death, she remains overwhelmed by grief. How can Mr. Trump not understand this? How can he not express any empathy for the fallen soldier's parents?
"Sacrifice, I don't think he knows the meaning of sacrifice, Mrs. Khan said. "Because when I was standing there, all America felt my pain. Without saying a single word. Everybody felt that pain."
In a rebuttal to Mr. Trump's disparaging remarks, Mr. Khan lashed out at the Republican Party nominee during an interview on Saturday, saying that his wife did not speak at the convention because it was too painful for her to talk about her son's death. Mr. Trump, he said, "is devoid of feeling the pain of a mother who has sacrificed her son.
"Trump is totally void of any decency because he is unaware of how to talk to a Gold Star family and how to speak to a Gold Star mother," said Mr. Khan.
On Monday morning, Mr. Trump continued to criticize Mr. Khan via Twitter. "Mr. Trump complained that Mr. Khan had become a ubiquitous presence in the news media since his speech at the convention, in which he excoriated the Republican presidential nominee," wrote The New York Times.
"Mr. Khan who does not know me, viciously attacked me from the stage of the DNC and is now all over T.V. doing the same," Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter. "Nice!"
Ibrahim Hooper, who is a spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, told The New York Times: "It's really despicable that anyone, let alone a presidential candidate, would choose to dishonor the service of an American who gave his life for this nation."
Instead of showing any remorse for the Khans, Mr. Trump's foolish and ignorant – inhuman – comments are the latest in a continuing and disturbing pattern and serve as the latest reminder of his total unfitness for becoming President of the United States. Donald Trump is a person without a soul. He's a loud bully, a bigot. He is unaccepting of criticism and easily becomes unhinged as the events of the past few days have shown loud and clear. He lacks compassion for others and he doesn't know the meaning of empathy.
Meanwhile, acting presidential and expressing compassion and respect, Mrs. Clinton said: "I was very moved to see Ghazala Khan stand bravely and with dignity in support of her son on Thursday night. And I was very moved to hear her speak last night, bravely and with dignity, about her son's life and the ultimate sacrifice he made for his country."
Appearing on CNN's State of the Union program over the weekend, Mr. Khan expressed: "Two things are absolutely necessary in any leader or any person who aspires, wishes, to be a leader. That is moral compass and second is empathy. ... Mr. Trump is a black soul."
On Monday, Senator John McCain of Arizona, a decorated hero of the Vietnam War, sharply criticized Trump, saying: "It is time for Donald Trump to set the example for our country and the future of the Republican Party." Sadly, Sen. McClain refused to back off his support for Mr. Trump. When will he and other Republic Party leaders such as House speaker Paul Ryan and Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell disavow Trump?
This morning, during a news conference following a joint address with the prime minister of Singapore in the East Room of the White House, President Obama gave his strongest denouncement of Mr. Trump. He said Mr. Trump is "woefully unprepared to do this job" and added that Republican criticisms of their party's presidential candidate "ring hollow" as they continue to support his bid for the presidency. Mr. Obama asked Republicans matter-of-factly: "If you are repeatedly having to say in very strong terms that what he has said is unacceptable, why are you still endorsing him? What does this say about your party, that this is your standard bearer?"
Indeed, Mr. Trump has shown time and again that he is capable of being both callous and cruel, and is unfit to be the commander in chief. He exhibits the character of a dark, dystopian dictator.
With less than 100 days until the November election, it remains to be seen how many more disgusting things Donald Trump will say that show off his ignorance and disrespect for the highest office in our country, his unfitness to be president, and his lack of empathy towards America's decent and ordinary citizens.
Sometimes, it takes a patriotic Muslim American family – one which emigrated to the United States so they could build a better life for themselves and who have made the ultimate sacrifice for this country – to remind all of us of the importance of the values and ideals that shape our American democracy.
Read the full text of Khizr Khan's speech to the DNC:
