I'm giving this four stars because I acknowledge the importance of what this book has to say. The importance does not outweigh the fact that Rushdie does the "oh look how badly they treat women they must be bad!" dance while amassing almost a dozen girlfriends in the refrigerator and a couple personas whose bad ass character definition is completely subsumed by their (male) lover's plot lines, but stands alongside it, equally worthy of mention. It's a balancing of my importance as a self with my importance as an idea, something that men the world over could learn something from. Intersectionality does not dampen your critical thinking skills; solipsism does. And when it comes to gynephobia or any other ideological oppression, solipsism kills.

n  Mahound, any new idea is asked two questions. When it's weak: will it compromise? We know the answer to that one. And now, Mahound, on your return to Jahilia, time for the second question: How do you behave when you win? When your enemies are at your mercy and your power has become absolute: what then?n

The main reason why I think this book deserves to be read is because while Rushdie does fall into authorial/political traps in regards to women, he does so while deconstructing the very power structures that propagate those traps. It's not a matter of "I did my best and no one should criticize me" feel-good stagnancy, nor a philosophical degeneration into nonentity that likes to pretend privilege is not a thing, but a real look at the compromises we live by in the societal boundaries of good and evil. This angry and messy view of things is particular important when considering the book, its history, and the particular reader I am, an atheist woman who grew to adulthood in the wake of 9/11. I have my own issues due to my identity, but I'll never be thought a terrorist.

n  Emboldened by the lights and the patient, silent lens, he goes further. These kids don't know how lucky they are, he suggests. They should consult their kith and kin. Africa, Asia, the Caribbean: now those are places with real problems. Those are places where people might have grievances worth respecting. Things aren't so bad here, not by a long chalk; no slaughters here, no torture, no military coups. People should value what they've got before they lose it. Ours always was a peaceful land, he says. Our industrious island race.n

I know people died for the sake of this book, I know people died for the sake of my country's obsessions with security and military industrial complex as a direct result of Islamophobia, and I know how easy it would be to use one to excuse the other. It's the same parsed feeling when Rushdie writes about current events in Ferguson twenty-six years before in fiction form, and then goes on to comment how the martyr of his particular story had a history of abusing women that does not receive coverage for the sake of solidarity. What's important here is how little confidence there is in regards to the "right" answer to all this, how Rushdie handles the choice between in such a way that the good and the bad of each are readily apparent and always in metamorphosis. Much like Murakami, I found myself questioning my own beliefs not because of how characters I had identified with had suffered, but due to the genuine interest the author had in questioning the lines of good and evil and what that all meant for our effort to live. Both of them have issues with writing female characters, but the "worth reading" quality is high enough to merit a pass.

n  Allie had a way of switching from the concrete to the abstract, a trope so casually achieved as to leave the listener half-wondering if she knew the difference between the two; or, very often, unsure as to whether, finally, such a difference could be said to exist.n

If I can do it, so can you. Personal offence does not impress me when lives are on the line, and that goes for any and all lives.

“What kind of idea are you? Are you the kind that compromises, does deals, accomodates itself to society, aims to find a niche, to survive; or are you the cussed, bloody-minded, ramrod-backed type of damnfool notion that would rather break than sway with the breeze? – The kind that will almost certainly, ninety-nine times out of hundred, be smashed to bits; but, the hundredth time, will change the world.”

Wow - my head wants to explode. Rushdie is one of a kind!

"The quintessence of the struggle between the human and spiritual
SOY: 10+10+10=10

This novel knocks you down and immediately immerses you in its pages, not giving you the opportunity to tear yourself away from what is happening until you turn the last page.

It was undoubtedly scary to approach this work, fearing that the text would turn out to be confusing and full of various allusions that the modern Russian reader might simply not understand. Fortunately, the translator did an incredible job and accompanied the text with a (sometimes unnecessarily) detailed commentary. But it will also be important to note that one admires the poetic nature of Rushdie's own language. This is not a dry text; it is a real epic tale, where the author makes the human and the spiritual meet face to face.

The novel is an excellent example of magical realism and reading - intentionally or not - one draws parallels with Milorad Pavic. And the unchanging dreams of the main characters too are a direct inheritance from Mikhail Bulgakov, however the author himself does not deny this. I want to emphasise the originality of the novel, its subtle humour and universal sadness. It's amazing how both long-familiar and newly learnt stories flourish here.

In the book one inevitably deigns to find something that will deeply offend religious sentiment, although I am sure that those need to find such offence always will. Nevertheless, a number of facts are presented historically quite correctly, and a number are fabrications of the author himself. At the same time, even the translator emphasizes the deep spirituality of Rushdie himself (which becomes noticeable towards the end of the book).

In a land as ancient as England, there is no room for new stories.
To say that the book is not easy to read is an understatement, though it is nonetheless interesting. "Satanic Verses" is not so easy to skim through, sipping seagulls; everything is more serious here. In fact, once upon a time I had already read this book, or rather, it fell into my hands from my dad, who, perhaps, was tempted by the hype surrounding the novel, and at the time I was too young to appreciate it. Now I want to renew in my memory the work that caused the fatwa calling on Muslims to execute all those who were related to the publishing of the novel (and Salman Rushdie, of course, in the first instance).

Question: What is the opposite of faith?
Not disbelief. It’s too final, confident, closed. It's also a kind of faith.
But here’s my doubt.
So, after a terrorist attack, two Indian actors fall from a plane: Saladin Chamcha and Jibrail Farishta. Chamcha, who emigrated to Britain a long time ago, was married to an Englishwoman, but by the winds of fate was turned into a devil. Meanwhile the popular actor Farishta turns out to be the incarnation of the archangel Jibrail. And the plot rushed, leading the author to the execution list. In general, Mr. Rushdie, as I understand him, is a bit of a thrill-seeker, teasing the whole Islamic world through his writing, but myself wouldn’t be able to do the same.

If a person is not sure of his essence, how can he know whether he is good or bad?
The translation of the book is a song of its own; and one must have nerves of steel to wade through it.”

Here are a few things I picked up along the way:

-I didn't understand all of it. I probably didn't understand even enough of it.
-But that didn't really matter. All that stuff I didn't understand? Was written so beautifully and so interestingly that I just wanted to lie down and let Rushdie pour his words all over me. Which, erm, isn't meant to sound as sexual as it appears to be when I look at written that way.
-There's this whole bit that involves butterflies that absolutely took my breath away. I could re-read that section over and over again and never get sick of it. I would like to write the whole section out in black Sharpie across my bedroom wall so I could stare at it every day. Alas, we rent and I'm not interested in painting over it before we move, so my walls will remain Sharpie-free.
-A fatwa, huh? For this? That cracks me up and makes me mad all at the same time. But it makes one realize the power of the written word.

Next time someone tells you print is dead, or that fiction doesn't mean anything, remember that Rushdie's life was on the line for this book.

Sem querer disputar o seu imenso valor literário e originalidade, a melhor forma que encontro para descrever esta magnífica obra é, como se a mesma fosse a junção de: "Cem anos de solidão" e "O evangelho segundo Jesus Cristo". Tudo com as devidas ressalvas.

الرواية فعلا مثيرة ، الاستطراد سمة أساسية في الرواية ، الخلط بين الثقافة الاسلامية و الهندية للأبطال واضح ، أيضا فكرة التناسخ ترد في فقرات كثيرة ، على المستوى الحقيقي و الخيالي
الاجزاء التي تحكي قصة النبي محمد ستغضب أي مسلم معتدل ، هناك الكثير من الأحداث المختلقة ، و لا تقف الأجزاء الصادمة عند قصة الغرانيق الشهيرة فقط ، هناك الكثير من الأفعال التي يقوم بها الصحابة ، مجتزأه من احداث وردت في السيرة ، او مختلقة تماما
في بعض الأحيان ألاحظ ان المترجم حذف بعض الجمل ، رغبة في الاختصار ، و مع ذلك فسلمان رشدي روائي موهوب و ذو رؤى جديده ، طبعا وقت صدور الرواية

This book should be read by most people not for the controversy it stirred up but for its subtle message about systemic racism in the western world. It should a part of the Eastern Canon, oh wait, there isn't one.

دوستانِ خردگرا، به نظرم 2 ستاره هم برایِ این کتاب زیاد بود
متاسفانه با گنده کردنِ موضوعِ این کتابِ مسخره توسطِ خمینی و عده ای ایرانیِ عرب پرست و نادان، تنها و تنها مردمِ سرزمینم خسارت دیدند
بله عزیزانم، با محکوم کردن و حلال کردنِ خون « سلمان رشدی»، باعث شدند که این مرد ناشناس و رمان نویس، به شهرتِ جهانی دست پیدا کند، و از طرفِ ملکۀ انگلستان لقبِ «سِر» را دریافت کند... بله، با این حکم، سلمان رشدی میلیونها دلار از فروش همین کتاب در حسابِ مبارکشان رفت... پول سرزمینِ من خرجِ هزاران هزار طاقۀ پارچه شد، تا بر رویِ آن مثلاً مرگ بر انگلیس و مرگ بر سلمان رشدی بنویسند، در این بین مردمِ انگلستان چه گناهی کرده اند!! مشخص نیست
چندین تُن و چندین و چند کیلو، خرجِ رنگ برایِ نوشتن این شعارها شد و درود فرستادن بر محمّد
در این میان چه کسی خسارت دید؟؟... اسلام؟ عرب پرستان؟ انگلیس؟ سلمان رشدی؟ ... خیر... فقط و فقط مردمِ ساده و مظلومِ سرزمینِ من خسارت و زیان دیدند که البته با نادانیِ خود مستحقِ ستم نیز میباشند و عده ای شاعر و نویسندۀ بیگناه و خردگرا نیز ضربه خوردند

دوستانِ گرانقدر، در هند و بنگلادش و اسلام آباد در اعتراض به «سلمان رشدی» چندین و چند نفر کشته و مجروح شدند، بیشتر آنها حتی این کتاب را نخوانده بودند، کتابی که شاید ضعیفترین کارِ این نویسندۀ هندی تبار بود
در ترکیه نزدیک به 40 تن از روشنفکران در آتشِ خشمِ این عرب پرستان سوختند
یک جوانِ نادان و احمقِ لبنانی به نامِ «مصطفی محمود مازح» در لندن به قصد کشتنِ سلمان رشدی، هنگامِ ساختِ بمب در هتلی منفجر شد و گَندَش از رویِ زمین پاک شد ولی از سویِ ایران لقبِ «شهید» گرفت
در ژاپن « هیوتوشی ایگاراشی» مترجمِ این کتاب، با چاقو تکه پاره شد
این همه کشتار و جنایت و جایزۀ 4 میلیون دلاری، برایِ کشتنِ نویسندۀ یک کتابِ داستانیِ ضعیف
عزیزانم، این رمان به سبک رئالیسم نوشته شده و شرحِ زندگیِ دو هندی است که از یک حادثۀ ترور، جان سالم بدر برده و به انگلستان رفته اند... تراژدی و کمدی هم چاشنیِ داستان است... بله... داستان زندگیِ مردمی است که در آرزوی دنیای بهتر، از کشور خویش می گریزند، مردمی که نه توان فرارویی به انسانی مدرن را دارند و نه می خواهند در دنیایِ سنتی زندگی کنند
برای دست یافتن به هویتی تازه، زندگیِ سراسر پردردسر را در بریتانیا از سر میگذرانند
در شهرِ خیالیِ «جاهلیه»، دوازده زنِ روسپی ساکنِ « خانۀ عشق» هستند که نامِ این 12 نفر توسطِ نویسنده هم نامِ با زنانِ محمّد، پیامبرِ اسلام است و اشاره هایی کنایه آمیز به خمینی و زندگیِ محمد نیز دارد، اما فقط بخش کوتاهی از این کتاب به پیامبرِ تازیان یعنی محمّد اشاره دارد
البته به عقیدۀ من بسیار کتابِ ضعیفی بود
پیشنهاد میکنم وقتِ ارزشمندِ خودتان را صرفِ خواندنِ این کتاب نکنید
<پیروز باشید و ایرانی>

Falling Angels/ Shooting Stars
Rushdie’s work is an allegory of sorts, of intertwining fables that builds a larger story. The outer plot presents Satan and Gabriel (anglicized by me) in the process of transformation. The myriad inner plots are dancing around a variety of topics. The story is well written by a man who knows how to use English globally. Rushdie tents the world of Asian immigrants into his two main characters. You could divide them in any one of a dozen ways into two camps. The most obvious division is between those who love their new land and those who only tolerate it, if not secretly despising it. If you were to follow the plot for a central theme, you could take up the thread of the emigrant. Or, you could grasp at the thread of relationships: man and woman, father and son, poor and society. You could take up the thread of faith and doubt. Eventually, you will see you have several skeins of thread that are woven into the warp and weft of a fabric.

The Satanic Verses is thought-provoking and controversial, with reason. It deals with complex themes of good and evil, faith and doubt, transformation and identity. The controversy stems from the inherent criticisms of the Muslim Koran, and the Prophet Muhammad. The publication of the book in 1988 led to censorship/ banning of the book in Muslim controlled countries. The Iranian government issued a fatwa calling for Rushdie’s death, after which he was kept hidden in exile in London for a while. The book is a complex multi-layered work that confronts the challenges faced by immigrants in a globalized world. The work does not focus on only one continent, though much of the story takes place in and over London… ‘Proper London.’

The first chapter is mind-blowing! I read it about 4-5 times before moving on, simply because it was catastrophically mesmerizing. It presents the two Bollywood superstar actors on a plane taken by terrorists… or rather falling from the plane. Incidentally, the plane is named the Bostan, one of the paradise gardens of the Muslim faith. (Ironically, you have these two ‘angels’ or ‘stars’ falling from heaven… or from the ‘garden of paradise.’ You could look at that a couple of different ways.) They fall throughout this first chapter. This story line moves in and out of the story, and forward and backward in time, bypassing through numerous other subplots that appear as dreams… and dreams inside of dreams, until it all ties together in the end with surprising results. Always though, you find yourself asking the same question the author presents you with: Goodguy badguy? Perhaps, the most haunting aspect of the story is the enduring view of the love-hate relationship between the emigrant and the country he immigrates into. Despite all he suffers, the immigrant loves his new home-country.

Direct Quotations follow:

“It isn’t easy to be a brilliant, successful woman in a city where the gods are female but the females are merely goods.”

“The human population outnumbers the divine by less than three to one…”

واحدة أخرى من الروايات التي تمثل القيء الفكري بكل معانيه وكأن الرجل أبى أن يحمل كل هذا الوسخ بداخله فتقيئه علينا في شكل رواية
فهو لم يعتدي فيها على الإسلام فقط بل على كل الديانات السماوية ولكن كان للإسلام ونبيه عليه افضل الصلاة والسلام النصيب الأكبر
فدائما كان وسيظل الإسلام شوكة فى حلق أمثاله
ممن كانوا إفراز نتن للثقافة والدعم الغربي ولنحطاط ولسذاجة الفكر الإلحادي فهذا فكر لم يعمي أصحابه فقط عن الايمان والأديان فالله الغني عنهم وعن إيمانهم ولكنه طمس على عقولهم وأصابها بحالة تيبس باتت غير قادرة حتى على التفكير السوي أو المنطقي فكثيراً قرأت في هذا الفكر فلم أخرج منه سوى بنوبات من الضحك المتواصل على ضحالة فكرهم وخلوه ليس من الايمان ولكن من العقل .
تتبعها حالة حزن على المخلوق المكرم المزين بالعقل من قبل خالقه كيف عبث بعقله الى هذا الحد فتحول بما كسبت يداه الى هذا المسخ !!!

في النهاية هذا عمل لم يحمل بين صفحاته ما يستحق القراءة لا فكر ولا إبداع ولا قصة ولا لغة ولا أسلوب أدبي لم يحمل سوى سموم فكرية وأمراض قلبية وعقلية ..

"Language is courage: the ability to conceive a thought, to speak it, and by doing so to make it true."

"When you throw everything up in the air anything becomes possible."



My most recent reading of Salmon Rushdie's The Satanic Verses was for a book club while I was living in Morocco. This made me very sensitive to the book's perceived insult against Islam as well as the ensuing outrage. Still, as I read it, the novel felt like it was much more about the immigrant experience and transformation than it was about the infamous and frequently referenced Satanic Verses passage.

The novel's language is remarkable; however, it also slows down the reading. That was a criticism of many in my book club. I feel that this is very worthwhile as there is so much humor in the language that a quick reading won't reveal. Another criticism, and one which I am more sympathetic to, is that reading The Satanic Verses can become a slog. It can be difficult to connect some of the tangential stories to our two main protagonists. I liked some of the 'side stories;' however, trying to keep track of all the characters and competing stories did turn the reading into a slog at times. Despite that, I'd still recommend the novel. I like how, from the beginning, anything seems possible!

هذه الرواية فضيحة مزدوجة .. فضيحة للحضارة الغربية التي افرزت هذا المسخ واحتضنته .. وفضيحة أيضاً بالنسبة لعلمائنا الذين اكتفوا بالسب والشتم ولم يهتم أحدهم ببيان عناصر السقوط في الرواية فناً وشكلاً ومضموناً
لم أجد غير رد للكبير أحمد ديدات الذي تطرق إلى بنية الرواية والتي قال أنها مقتبسة من عمل أدبي آخر
لكن لم أجد أحد من العلماء تطرق للناحية العقائدية وقصة الغرانيق التي آثرها رشدي
في الرواية
والتي حاول آثبات صحتها ليدحض بها نبؤة سيدنا محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم
جميع��م أكتفوا بالسب والشتم ولم نُقدم للغرب رد منطقي