Well, now it is official: Salman Rushdie is never going to be a favorite of mine.

I have devoured three of his books now, at least in part. His style is brilliant, sparkling, and imaginative. He is indeed a truly creative storyteller. However, his works just don't resonate with me.

This has nothing to do with the cultural distance, as Rushdie is a thoroughly Western writer. It has everything to do with style and spirit. Maybe his writing is too complex or too avant-garde for my taste.

Sorry, Salman. But I do believe that everyone has the right to express what they have to say, even if it is considered blasphemous by others. Freedom of speech is a fundamental right that should be protected, and we should respect the diversity of opinions and ideas.

Perhaps I will give his books another try in the future, but for now, I have to admit that I am not a fan.

Not wanting to dispute its immense literary value and originality, the best way I find to describe this magnificent work is as if it were the junction of: "One Hundred Years of Solitude" and "The Gospel According to Jesus Christ". All with the appropriate caveats.

This comparison serves to highlight the unique qualities that this work seems to possess. "One Hundred Years of Solitude" is renowned for its magical realism and complex family saga, while "The Gospel According to Jesus Christ" offers a profound exploration of religious themes and the life of Jesus. By suggesting that this new work combines elements of both, it implies a rich and multi-faceted narrative that delves into the realms of both the fantastical and the spiritual.

Of course, this is just a preliminary description, and a more in-depth analysis would be needed to fully appreciate the true essence of this remarkable piece of literature. But even at first glance, it is clear that it has the potential to be a truly great work that will captivate readers and leave a lasting impression.

While I firmly believe that this is an essential novel worthy of being read, there is a great deal of real-life commotion surrounding it. This external fuss perhaps exaggerates its significance in people's minds more than the actual quality of the text itself.

To be specific, the fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie in 1988, which effectively marked him for death for penning this novel, is more of a puzzler to someone like me than an obvious reality.

What? Is this title not blatantly about Satan writing poetry and a total affront to the Muslim people?

Well, that's precisely the point. Aside from a few rather satirical passages about an Imam, or rather, we can assume one particular Imam who ordered a hit on Rushdie's life, this novel is actually quite tame. Sure, there are a few assumptions about Muhammad and points of interpretation that are hinted at, which bring to light the fact that perhaps certain individuals are not entirely infallible. But this, in my opinion, is mild.

Especially considering the prevalence of racism today, this is frankly a lyrical, dense piece of literature that is often a pure delight. It is funny, strange, irreverent, satirical, and almost always enjoyable. It is a clever novel with multiple concurrent levels, dream sequences, magical realism, transformations, and provides a great insight into both Hindu and Muslim Indian life.

Is it an easy text to read? No, not particularly. In fact, it is so dense that I had to read it (both times) in short intervals just to be able to digest the rich content. While some novels are like pure popcorn, this one is a full, balanced meal.

Suffice it to say, I derived a great deal from it and Rushdie's writing is excellent. The concept of Gabriel and Satan as an Indian movie star and an Indian expatriate was never what I would have anticipated, but it is indeed fascinating.

Qiyāʾ...

The term "qiyāʾ" holds significance in certain contexts. It might refer to a concept, an individual, or an idea that is central to a particular field or area of study. However, without further specific information, it becomes challenging to provide a more detailed and comprehensive understanding of what exactly "qiyāʾ" entails.

Perhaps it is a key element in a religious or philosophical doctrine, carrying profound meanings and implications. Or maybe it is a term used in a specific cultural or social context, with its own set of connotations and interpretations.

In order to truly grasp the essence of "qiyāʾ," it would be necessary to explore it within the relevant framework, consider its historical, cultural, and social background, and analyze how it relates to other related concepts and ideas. Only then can a more accurate and in-depth understanding of "qiyāʾ" be achieved.

From the archives: September 27, 1988

The controversial first draft of the Quran, The Satanic Verses, which had been hidden away in a safe deposit box for 1379 years, finally made its appearance yesterday. The reception it received was a mixed one.

One fan was extremely excited, exclaiming, "Wheeeeee! I'm so excited!! A new book by Allah! Can you believe it?!" She had spent all night queuing up outside her local Barnes & Noble.

However, other readers were less enthusiastic about the novel. They took exception to its portrayal of the beloved character Mohammad as a lecherous small-time crook. Influential blogger AyatollahK has been particularly vocal in his opposition. In a tersely worded post yesterday, he said, "Allah never intended this book to be published. Salman Rushdie and HarperCollins are agents of Shaitan and will be hunted down like dogs."

The appearance of The Satanic Verses has clearly sparked a great deal of debate and controversy, with people on both sides expressing their views passionately. It remains to be seen how this will all play out in the days and weeks to come.

This book holds great significance and should be read by the majority of people.

It is not because of the controversy it has aroused, but rather for the profound and subtle message it conveys regarding systemic racism in the western world.

It has the potential to be an important part of what could be considered the Eastern Canon. However, upon further reflection, one realizes that there isn't really a well-defined and established Eastern Canon in the same way as there is in the Western literary tradition.

This lack of a unified Eastern Canon presents an interesting opportunity to explore and include diverse works like this one, which can offer valuable insights into different aspects of human experience and social issues.

By reading this book, people can gain a better understanding of the complex issue of systemic racism and contribute to the ongoing dialogue and efforts to address it.

Perhaps it is time to start building a more inclusive and representative Eastern Canon that encompasses works that speak to the experiences and concerns of a wider range of people.

They did NOT get him❗❗

This simple sentence holds a great deal of significance. It implies that someone was trying to obtain or capture him, but they were unsuccessful.

The use of the exclamation marks emphasizes the importance of this fact. It could be that he was a wanted criminal, a valuable asset, or someone with a particular skill or knowledge.

The three pairs of hands in the emoji "

I have made up my mind that it is high time for me to part ways with this book.

I have endeavored to persevere with it. However, it meanders about in a rather erratic manner, featuring an excessive number of moments of abstract and nonsensical story interpolations.

Often, when I pick it up, I have the distinct feeling as if I have attention deficit disorder. I invariably have to reread the last few pages that I read previously in the hope of refreshing my memory for the current reading session.

Regrettably, due to the highly abstract nature of the book, new characters seem to materialize out of thin air as if they have been present all along, instantly inducing disorientation and confusion in this reader.

There simply isn't sufficient continuity to make the reading experience satisfying. After I "cheated" on this book and read another one instead, I finally came to the realization that it is time for me to let it go.

I am typically a faithful reader. But this book is not providing me with what I require, and I must forge ahead.

Admittedly, I do have a hint of regret and a slight inclination of "you should give it one more try" lingering within me. Nevertheless, I am going to trust my instincts on this matter and seek out something more fulfilling.

The text seems to be a complex and rather controversial exploration of various themes related to literature, religion, and society. It begins by highlighting the author's skill in playing with different narrative techniques and how the story affects the reader's mind. The story is set in India, a land of diverse languages and religions, and it shows the conflict between the traditional and the modern. The author creates an Islamic narrative that goes beyond the Quran and the Prophet, incorporating elements of fantasy and myth with religious and political references. The story focuses on the Prophet Muhammad and his struggle to unite the different deities into the angels of Allah. However, the "Lady" of the desert refuses to accept Allah and continues to worship the female deities. The Prophet eventually resorts to trickery to gain power and impose the new religious belief. The story also features a diverse cast of characters, including female prophetic figures, spirits of evil, and fanatical followers. The author's portrayal of these characters and events led to a death sentence and violent actions by the Muslim community. Overall, the reading experience of this book is a mix of emotions, including sadness, laughter, confusion, and exhaustion. The author thanks his beloved co-reader, Kyriako Sorokkou, known as Talantara, for their shared journey. The author concludes by saying that the destination and the journey are not as important as the "companion" on the journey. He wishes the readers a good reading experience and sends many greetings.

The fame of Salman Rushdie has been more closely linked to the fatwa of the always affectionate and endearing Ayatollah Khomeini than to the quality of his works, or at least that's what it seems to me. I had this book pending since I started my adventures on Goodreads a whopping five years ago, but it turns out that the controversial work didn't really attract the attention of a young Julio more interested in passing biochemistry than in the torrents of bile of the Islamists. However, the events that have been taking place in Europe these months, which I'm not going to mention since we all have a TV, or failing that, a mobile phone, have been the unfortunate spur that has encouraged me to read the scourge of imams and mujahideen.

The Satanic Verses have nothing to do with Anton LaVey or with black bibles written with white plastic decorations. This is the story of Gibreel, a Bollywood actor at the height of his success, and Saladin, an Indian immigrant turned talented British voice actor, who instead of dying in the plane crash along with the rest of the crew have the cheek to survive the explosion and subsequent fall from 10,000 feet. As a punishment, because God's sense of humor is, as Aziraphale would say, ineffable, Gibreel obtains an angelic halo and Saladin devil's legs and matching horns, both literal and metaphorical (What's up? When someone is declared dead, they are expected at home). That's just the premise, from there I can't say anything more, not because of the risk of spoilers, no, but because I don't know.

From their respective metamorphoses, the story, or rather, the stories, begin to branch out and become entangled in such a way that it would be a lie to tell you that it's about something. Rushdie's prose is like a natural disaster: its magnitude is as impressive as it is disturbing. Just like a hurricane or a flood, its force is overwhelming: the different stories unfold uninterrupted but entangled by constant references to popular culture, the Quran, India or anything that happened to Rushdie at that moment; to which must be added the very varied and exotic words in Hindi or Arabic. This doesn't make the story confusing, but it does make certain passages unintelligible, not only because of the author's verbal incontinence, but also because of the magical realism that gives that dreamy atmosphere to everything, of not knowing if you are witnessing a collective hallucination or a strange reality. It is for this last reason that I say that his prose is impressive - because I think I have made clear the cause of the disturbance - because although you don't understand anything, his way of writing is hypnotic, as if he never seems to run out of resources or imagination. I'm afraid that the writing process of this book consisted of long sessions of "research" with large amounts of peyote; it's the only explanation I can find for so much delirium and the crazy path that the characters follow throughout the plot. It gives the impression that Rushdie had thought of the beginning and the end of his main couple, but that he made the knot by throwing darts at a target with phrases and very dilated eyes.

Well, so far there doesn't seem to be any really offensive element that would justify a stoning in the main square or a close shave with a scimitar, right? Once I finished the book, I can only say that what surprises me is not the reaction of the Islamist sector, but that Rushdie managed to survive after writing this. Because he really, really, went too far. To begin with, the criticisms he makes of Islam, of Nationalism - with a capital N, because it's for everyone -, of racism and of Thatcherism are beastly, and on top of that he does them in the way that fanatical and closed minds hate the most, from the most ironic humor, with a very black sarcasm and a feigned innocence that ridicules while criticizing, or in other words, criticizes twice.

Specifically, there are two stories that raise the most blisters. One deals with the life of the prophet Muhammad, how he went from merchant to prophet and how he managed to impose his doctrine, the other about a girl who swears that the archangel Gibreel has ordered her to take all her people on a pilgrimage, on foot, to Mecca. From India, which is an important point. The first one you can already imagine is not very hagiographic. Rushdie describes the prophet as a fraud, an ordinary person who changes the shuras according to his desires, disguising his human whims as angelic messages. Starting from the fact that the mere mention of the humanity of Muhammad is already a touchy subject in itself, imagine if on top of that the different adventures of the prophet and his opponents make them look like dummies (the passage about the prophet's wives and the prostitutes is really spicy). Indeed, more than one imam had an apoplexy when reading them. By contrast, the other story is hardly offensive, when it is a ferocious criticism of religious fanaticism and the lack of critical thinking. However, in this one it could be said that there is a tiny hopeful message, because although the story doesn't end well, because basically it's people happily throwing themselves into the holocaust, such is the nature of the martyr's faith that he always feels happy. Look, you die like an idiot, but happy. It's something "positive", depending on how you look at it.

In summary, The Satanic Verses could be classified as a masterpiece perfectly for its own merits and for its influence on history. If I don't give it five stars it's because of Rushdie's convoluted style. Yes, as I said before, it's hypnotic and very original, but I hate not understanding what I'm reading because you're throwing images at me without rhyme or reason, without stopping for a moment for me to catch my breath. It makes me nervous, I can't help it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one, because seeing the reviews of this book, many people abandon it when everything goes crazy, that is, more or less at page 50. If you're one of those readers who don't care if they're being systematically shaken and you value more how the story is written than the story itself, I'm sure you're going to love this novel. For my part, I'm looking forward to fully immersing myself again in that exotic and surreal India of Rushdie: we'll see if his next book gets five stars.

Satanic Verses.. Salman Rushdie

I don't understand why it is of such great importance to atheists to prove to us believers that there is no God? Is there a hell for believers in atheism that they are afraid we will mention, for example? I understand that one of them might answer that it is the duty of an aware person to rid the deluded of their delusions so that the delusion does not ruin their lives and the lives of those around them. Well, I will give examples of these people and say: Do you see the lives of all believers being ruined because of what you consider to be your two delusions? These people whom you target with this talk of yours are most likely not going to read a book like this - or any other book for that matter - and they are most likely going to strive to cut off many of your sensitive organs to silence your foul mouth. So why didn't you try to convince us, the rest of the "rational people", that what we believe in is mere delusion.. even though our lives are similar to yours to some extent.. knowledge and matter?

Like other Muslims who still remember the tragic and angry events related to this novel in their minds.. I know very well the violence that killed many people because of this novel.. and I still remember the famous fatwa of Khomeini to shed the blood of Salman Rushdie because of it.

It is in my nature not to judge things based on what I hear.. so I decided to read it myself in order to be able to judge for myself.

It is very possible to describe this novel as excellent fantasy.. and I mean here as a genre and not as a form of praise! It blatantly exposes the taboo of religion.. and perhaps it would be fair to compare it with other novels that exposed the taboo of religion.. like "The Da Vinci Code" and "Azazel" - which I have not read yet so I will not talk about it - and "The Submission of Nasserine". There is no room for comparison at all between this and "The Da Vinci Code".. Brown in his ingenuity has blended truth with deception and he cannot be described in any way as being malicious towards the person of Christ.. rather he may be exposing the same monotheistic idea as Rushdie in "Satanic Verses" but the devil is in the style!

The reader of "Satanic Verses" cannot but feel the great hatred that Rushdie has for the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, to the extent that he describes him in this way. While we did not feel the same with Brown in "The Da Vinci Code" despite the existence of the same monotheistic idea.. nor with "The Submission of Nasserine" where I did not find anything blatantly malicious towards religion!

The novel tells the story of Gibreel Farishta, the famous Indian actor as the novel says, and Saladin Chamcha, who fled from his country, India, to London.. where Rushdie symbolizes their fall from the hijacked plane after its explosion as a symbol of the fall of Gibreel, the great angel, and Iblis, the great devil, to the earth. And the novel then tells of the real merging of both personalities into an angel and a devil in fact.. as well as the many horrible mergers of other humans which makes it a fantasy novel.

And in between there was this historical account of Gibreel's dreams that Rushdie wanted to be about Mahound, who is Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him.. and I don't know where Rushdie got this name from and after searching I found that he means by it "not a dog"! And it is known that the word "Hound" means in English "a hunting dog" and what is the negative of that where it is said that Rushdie knows the Arabic language to some extent.

The historical account is full of mistakes.. like the appearance of Khalid bin Walid, who is the son of one of the great men of Quraysh, as a person of low status and he is accused of "drunkenness"! And many other horrible historical mistakes.. and I had previously dealt with the issue of the permissible limit in making historical mistakes for the sake of the literary context.. and I have never come across a novel that carries this huge amount of pure historical lies. One of the most important things that Rushdie is exposed to here is the story of the stoning.. when he mentions in many novels that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, had mentioned the gods of Quraysh in a good way in order to win their approval and get closer to them.. and then it is reported from him later that he justified that by saying that the devil had put these words in his mouth and it was not his words. And from here came the name of the novel "Satanic Verses". And a lot was also said about the revelation always descending in a way that benefits the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and in that there is a clear indication that the revelation is only from the Prophet himself and not from God. Not to mention the "veil" which Rushdie made a house of prostitution in Mecca where there were twelve centuries that followed the wives of the Prophet and the story of Baal the poet who married them. And the Muslims after the conquest of Mecca killed them all! Also, Mr. Rushdie made most of the characters in the novel heroes of pornographic films with many relationships so that Hind, the wife of Abu Sinbel "Abu Sufyan", had a lover who was Baal the poet mentioned earlier.. and she is not chaste!

I remember a saying by Latifa to Mr. Youssef Zidan: It is the right of people to conspire against you. And perhaps I rephrased the sentence in my way and said: It is natural for people to conspire against you. For I do not think that conspiracies are a "right" for anyone. The observer here is that it is natural for there to be those who try to get something from you whether they hate you or for any other reason. But the important thing is the way of response.. and for sure, what happened as a violent reaction from many people and what some people reached to the extent of killing people who have nothing to do with the novel, neither close nor far, is not a correct response.

I know for a fact that there were books that were published in response to the novel "The Da Vinci Code".. and the novel "Azazel" by Youssef Zidan by people specialized in the science of Christian theology and this is of course their right. Regardless of the richness of those books in responses and the extent of their correctness and strength in the response.

Thought can only be combated with opposing thought.. thus you can invade the minds and perhaps the hearts as well.

Then, let's talk a little about freedom.. After this novel, Rushdie became a target.. and after this painful period of his life ended, he became a symbol of freedom of expression! Is it freedom of expression for someone to come and say about me, for example, that I am stupid.. and then I am told that this is freedom of expression and I have the right to respond? What harm would I do if I responded? Do I want to say to him, for example, that you are a fool? Is that freedom of expression?

My understanding of freedom of expression is that I can say what I want as long as I do not harm anyone.. and this book can only be blatant harm.. it does not escape the eye of a reader with sound understanding.

Many times I thought during my reading that I would abandon it.. but I am not one of those who give up so I will not give up what I started and then blame the writer for causing boredom! You have the right to a fair chance.. which is that I hear you or read you completely.. and then my role begins in exercising freedom of expression!

What kind of idea are you? Are you the kind that compromises, does deals, and accommodates itself to society, aiming to find a niche and survive? Or are you the cussed, bloody-minded, ramrod-backed type of damnfool notion that would rather break than sway with the breeze? This is a profound question that makes one's mind race.

Rushdie's words are truly thought-provoking. The idea of being either the compromising type or the unyielding one is presented in a vivid and powerful way.

The thought that the latter kind of idea will almost certainly be smashed to bits ninety-nine times out of a hundred, but that one time in a hundred it could change the world is both inspiring and humbling.

Wow - my head wants to explode. Rushdie is indeed one of a kind! His ability to express such complex and profound ideas in a few sentences is truly remarkable. It makes one stop and think about the kind of ideas we hold and the impact they could have on the world around us.