I'm very torn about this book. On one hand, I can completely understand why some people hate this book for its messiness and its convoluted nature. I'm not a slow reader by any means (and this isn't a long book), but I certainly had to put it down once or twice and return to it after some much needed recovery time. It's not light reading, but then again I didn't expect it to be considering the title.

Despite everything, I cannot bring myself to hate this book, because it certainly has some very strong points (for me at least). Despite the constant diving in and out of Solanka's past life and the many, many directions Rushdie chooses to follow in relation to Solanka's fury, I really do feel that there are some great sections in this book and if this considered one of Rushdie's worst books, I really do look forward to reading his other works. Rushdie is wonderful at description and atmosphere, but the heavy and constant references and thick winding veins that stem from very simple things (such as Solanka walking past a Latin sign) can definitely be seen as bogging down the story with unnecessary detail.The easiest way I can describe this book is to imagine it like a heart monitor - the plot does rather slowly build up (about 60% in that's when something actually "happens" beyond Solanka's own descriptions of his past and current life dealing with the other characters he meets in New York) but be prepared for the large "spikes" on the heart monitor signalling the return of Solanka's rants, internal struggles and Rushdie's long winding veins of topic matter that stem from these.This is not a big "plot" book.

If you're a big fan of deep deep introspection, this book might even overdo it for you. Also, if you're someone who needs to somewhat like the main character to carry on, this probably won't do it - Malik Solanka is a selfish and foolish character, but is ultimately very interesting.

As for the ending, I was left feeling a little empty. I suppose the ending made sense, but in many ways after all the deep introspection and the climax of the story I really didn't think Solanka would go in the direction that he did - I think I was expecting some sort of explosion on Solanka's part even after the fury, but after some thought this is probably not even needed - the ending, despite leaving me wanting a little more, is already very sad, because Solanka is one to be pitied as he is seen trying to cling onto the remains of the life he chose to throw away.

Do I recommend this book? Yes - but I wouldn't blame you for putting it down because it's certainly not everyone's cup of tea.

A book so different from the ones I’ve read. Salman Rushdie certainly is a great writer with an impressive lexicon and extensive world knowledge. The satirical aspects in the book are more interesting than the storyline itself, but its intertwinings with the philosophical mind-twists of Professor Malik Solanka make the book highly entertaining. The story’s situation is weird, improbable, but not at all unrealistic. Fury is the key to the story, or the Furies, more specifically – a theory that every human being harbors rage, waiting to be set free. Rushdie plays with modernity, realizing that new technologies (e.g. Internet assets) are “an exact mirror of the divine experience of time”, as everything exists at once. In the past, “human beings were imprisoned in the calendar of their days.” Another mirror in the story is reflected in Professor “Dollmaker” Solanka’s fiction; a reflection of himself and the people he cares about in a world where the Furies rule.

Tot bladzijde 80 van de 254, verder ben ik niet gekomen. Geen doorkomen aan. Onsamenhangend geklets over een professor in de filosofie die naar Amerika is geëmigreerd om aan zijn vrouw te ontkomen en zijn leven verder als poppenmaker slijt, zoiets... Wat een slecht boek.
De naam Salman Rushdie stond in 2001 kennelijk garant voor zoveel succes dat hij - als buitenlander - dit verhaal schreef dat als boekenweekgeschenk in dat jaar werd uitgegeven. Het lijkt er op, dat alleen de naam van de auteur garant zou staan voor een goed verhaal en dat hij, alvorens hem als schrijver aan te wijzen, niet is bevraagd en dat de selectiecommissie (?) klakkeloos is uitgegaan van zijn kwaliteiten als schrijver.
Zie ook: https://www.maxpam.nl/archief/Rushdie...

Nunca li outro livro de Salman Rushdie, mas já calculo que este seja o seu pior.
A ideia inicial da história de Malik Solanka, a premissa que dá título ao livro e que se baseia nas Eríneas da Oresteia é promissora. No entanto, esta "fúria" de Solanka e da sociedade que critica também resulta numa certa desordem do próprio enredo.
O que se adivinhava um romance inflamado acerca do virar do século em breve se mostra uma manta de retalhos caótica. Estes retalhos são a vida de cada uma das personagens que cruza o caminho do professor Solanka, assim como também são pedaços da sua vida, revista constantemente sob um escrutínio milimétrico e rígido - mais uma vez, caótico.

Não consigo atribuir menos de 3 estrelas a "Fúria", pois as críticas levadas a cabo por Salman Rushdie acerca da contemporaneidade e a premissa inicial do romance são geniais. Por outro lado, não consigo atribuir mais que essas 3 estrelas devido à falta de linearidade e organização na narrativa.