Wise, humane, playfully outrageous, space-time-dilating, credulity-straining, genre-bending & heart-rending, skeptical-not-cynical, erudition-bespeckled and yet streetwise & of its time, this was a vertigo-inducing roller-coaster of a polyphonic novel that grows and grows on you, even if (as with me) magic realism isn't your main squeeze. I will read this'un again, methinks.

آيات شيطانية.. سلمان رشدي

لستُ أفهم لماذا هو أمر شديد الأهمية لدى الملحدين من أن يثبتوا لنا كمؤمنين أنه ليس ثمة إله ؟ هل هناك نار لدى الملاحدة للمؤمنين يخافون علينا من أن نوردها مثلاً ؟ أتفهم من أن أحدهم سيجيب بأنه من الواجب على الشخص الواعي أن يخرج الموهومين من وهمهم حتى لا ينغص الوهم حياتهم وحياة المحيطين بهم. حسناً، سأجاري أمثال هؤلاء فأقول: وهل ترى حياة جميع المؤمنين منغصة بسبب ما تعده أنتَ وهماً ؟ إن هؤلاء الذين تقصدهم بكلامك هذا هم على الأرجح لن يقرؤوا كتاباً كهذا -ولا كتاباً آخر بطبيعة الحال- وهم على الأرجح سيهرعون ليقطعوا لك الكثير من الأعضاء الحساسة إسكاتاً لفمك البذيء. فلمَ تحاول أن تقنعنا بأننا نحن البقية من "العقلاء" بأن ما نؤمن به محض وهم.. على الرغم من أن حياتنا تقارب إلى حد ما حياتك.. علماً ومادة ؟

كغيري من المسلمين الذين لا تزال ذكرى الأحداث المؤسفة الغاضبة على هذه الرواية في عقولهم.. أعلم جيداً ذلك العنف الذي قتل الكثيرين بسبب هذه الرواية.. ولا زلت أذكر فتوى الخميني الشهيرة بإهدار دم سلمان رشدي على إثرها.

من طبيعتي ألا أحكم على الأمور بناء على ما أسمع.. لذا قررتُ أن أقرأها بنفسي لأتمكن من الحكم بنفسي.

من الممكن جداً وصف هذه الرواية بالفنتازية بامتياز.. وأعني هنا كتصنيف وليس كنوع من المديح ! هي تعرّض وبشكل وقح بتابو الدين.. ولربما قد يكون من باب الإنصاف أن نقارنها بروايات أخرى تعرّضت لتابو الدين.. كشيفرة دافنشي وعزازيل –التي لم أقرأها بعد لهذا لن أتحدث عنها- والعار لتسليمة نسرين..
لا مجال للمقارنة على الإطلاق بين هذه وشيفرة دافنشي.. فقد أبدع براون في حبكته بدمج الحقيقة بالخداع ولا يمكن وصفه بأي حال من الأحوال بكونه مسيئاً لشخص المسيح.. بل هو يعرض لربما ذات الفكرة الإلحادية لرشدي في آيات شيطانية لكن شتان ما بين الأسلوبين !
لا يمكن للقاريء في الآيات الشيطانية ألا يشعر بمدى الكراهية الشديدة التي يكنها رشدي لشخص النبي عليه أفضل الصلاة والسلام حتى يصوره بهذه الطريقة. بينما لم نشعر بذات الأمر مع براون في شيفرة دافنشي رغم وجود ذات الفكر الإلحادي.. ولا مع العار فتسليمة نسرين حيث لم أجد ما يسيء للدين على الإطلاق !

تتحدث الرواية عن جبريل فاريشتا الممثل الهندي الشهير كما تقول الرواية وصلاح الدين شمشا الهارب من وطنه الهند إلى لندن.. حيث يرمز رشدي لسقوطهما من الطائرة المخطوفة إثر إنفجارها على أنه رمز سقوط جبريل كبير الملائكة وإبليس الشيطان الأكبر إلى الأرض. وتتحدث الرواية فيما بعد عن إنمساخ حقيقي لكلا الشخصيتين إلى ملاك وشيطان فعلاً.. كما صورت الكثير من الإنمساخات الفظيعة لبشر آخرين مما يجعل منها رواية فنتازية..

وكان بين الفترة والأخرى ذلك السرد التاريخ لأحلام جبريل التي شاء لها رشدي أن تكون عن ماهاوند والذي هو محمد عليه أفضل الصلاة والسلام.. ولستُ أدري من أين جاء رشدي بهذا الاسم والذي وبعد بحث وجدتُ أنه يعني به "ليس كلباً" ! ومن المعروف أن كلمة “Hound” تعني في الإنجليزية كلب الصيد "السلق" وما هي ما النافية حيث يقال أن رشدي يعرف اللغة العربية إلى حد ما.

السرد التاريخي مليء بالأخطاء.. كظهور خالد بن الوليد وهو ابن أحد كبراء قريش على أنه رجل صغير الشأن ويمتهن "السقاية" ! وغيرها الكثير من الأخطاء التاريخية الفظيعة.. وقد كنتُ أعلّق سابقاً في مسألة الحد المسموح به في أرتكاب المغالطات التاريخية لخدمة السياق الروائي.. ولم أتعرض يوماً إلى رواية تحمل هذا الكم الهائل من الكذب التاريخي المحض. من أهم ما تعرّض له رشدي هنا هو حكاية الغرانيق.. عندما ذكر في روايات كثيرة أن النبي عليه أفضل والسلام قد ذكر آلهة قريش بشكل حسن كي يكسب رضاهم ويتقرب منهم.. ثم ورد عنه فيما بعد أنه برر ذلك بأن الشيطان قد دسّ هذه العبارات في كلامه ولم يكن كلامه هو. ومن هنا جاء اسم الرواية "آيات شيطانية". وقد ورد الكثير أيضاً من الكلام عن كون الوحي دائماً ينزل بما يفيد النبي عليه أفضل الصلاة والسلام وفي ذلك إيحاء واضح بكون الوحي إنما هو من ذات النبي وليس من عند الله. ناهيكِ عن "الحجاب" والذي جعل منه رشدي دار بغاء في مكة كانت فيه اثنتي عشر عاهرة قمن بتقليد زوجات النبي وحكاية بعل الشاعر الذي تزوجهن. وقام المسلمون بعد فتح مكة بقتلهم جميعاً ! كما أن السيد رشدي جعل من معظم شخوص الرواية أبطال أفلام إباحية لكثيرة العلاقات حتى أن هند زوجة أبو سنبل "أبو سفيان" كان لها عشيق هو بعل الشاعر المذكور آنفاً.. كما أنها لا تشيخ !

أذكر مقولة لطيفة للسيد يوسف زيدان: أنه من حق الناس أن يتآمروا ضدك. ولربما أعيد صياغة الجملة بطريقتي فأقول: من الطبيعي أن يتآمر الناس ضدك. فلا أعتقد أن المؤامرات هي "حق" لأحد. الشاهد هنا هو من الطبيعي أن يوجد من يحاول أن ينال منك سواء كان يبغضك أو لأي سبب آخر. لكن المهم هو كيفية الرد.. وبكل تأكيد، ما حدث من رد فعل عنيف من الكثيرين ومما وصل من البعض لدرجة قتل أناس لا شأن لهم بالرواية لا من قريب ولا من بعيد، هو ليس برد صحيح.

أعلم تمام العلم بأنه صدرت كتب ترد على رواية شيفرة دافنشي.. ورواية عزازيل ليوسف زيدان من أناس متخصصين في علم اللاهوت المسيحي وهذا بالطبع من حقهم. بغض النظر عن فحوى تلك الكتب من ردود ومدى صحته وقوتها في الرد.

إن الفكر لا يحارب إلا بفكر مضاد.. هكذا تتمكن من غزو العقول ولربما القلوب أيضاً.

ثم، دعونا نتحدث عن الحرية قليلاً.. لقد أصبح رشدي بعد هذه الرواية مطارداً.. وبعد ان انتهت هذه المرحلة العصيبة من حياته أصبح ممثلاً لحرية التعبير ! هل من حرية التعبير أن يأتي أحدهم فيقول عني أحمق مثلاً.. ثم يقال لي أن هذه حرية تعبير ويحق لي الرد ؟ ماذا عساني أرد ؟ هل أرد بأن أقول له أنت أبله مثلاً ؟ هل تلك هي حرية التعبير ؟

إن مفهومي لحرية التعبير هو أن أقول ما أشاء ما دمت لا أسيء لأحد.. وهذا الكتاب لا يمكن أن يكون سوى إساءة صريحة.. لا تخفى عن عين قاريء ذي فهم سليم.

كثيراً ما فكرتُ أثناء قراءتي بأن أتركها.. لكنني لستُ من هؤلاء الذين ينهزمون فلا ينهون ما بدؤوه ثم يتهمون الكاتب بإثارة الملل ! لكَ عليّ حق في فرصة عادلة.. هي أن أسمعك أو أن أقرءك بشكل كامل.. ثم يبدأ دوري في ممارسة حرية التعبير !

“The Satanic Verses” are my favourite novel by one of my favourite writers and would make my Top 10 any time of day (ok, Top 5). With magic realism as my genre of choice and Salman Rushdie as my personal sovereign in the field, I am incapable of writing anything that would even come close to a decent review. So I will at least try to sketch out some of the aspects of this novel I enjoyed most.

Staying true to the author’s trademark style, this is a vivid and powerful novel, baroque in its opulence. Again there are so many layers and characters (although not as many as in “Midnight’s Children”), dozens and maybe even hundreds of references and allusions, rich imagination and endless comical effects. This is no story for a lazy or inflexible mind, but at the same time the author never drowns his reader in intellectualism, but creates an account of exaltation and the passion of story-telling in epic proportions.

Some of the topics covered are again heritage and migration, change and belief and identity, with melange and hybridism to it. Identity in this case is more focused on moral and individual identity (even symbolically with the two protagonists being an actor and a voice actor, reinventing their birth name etc.), which is one of the aspects I appreciate very much.

The structure is not so much a fan, but rather consists of layers with characters, motifs and references piercing through them. Throughout the entire novel there are stories within the story, various forms of its re-enacting on different levels and even stories within dreams within the story, creating a multiple distance to the present-day sphere and to reality. As the main embedded narrative is transferred several times to different planes (with wonderful details like the recurring names of the characters) the result are twisted parallels, distorting mirror images of belief and unscrupulousness, but also vulnerability and loneliness. (The story of Mahound, of his ideals and political compromises, his business skills etc. is so rich in thoughts and emotions, but I would not be able to comment that without spoilers.) And still there is always the sophisticated and ironic dance on the verge of myth and truth under the diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia.

I was fascinated with the idea of being seduces and tempted by words (one of the reasons why “Othello”, often referred to here as well, is one of my favourite plays), as well as the constant questioning of truth, reality and revelation (“It was so, it was not so” reminded me very much of “Moby Dick”).

The two protagonists are delightful as counterparts to each other and even to themselves, without that being a paradox. They are socially different and have different functions in the story; while one is more spiritual and bound to miscomprehend, the other is rather grounded in society and mostly misunderstood. Interestingly, their stereotypical mythical features will more than anything show the many facets of the human soul.

If I had to find just one word to describe this novel, I would call it noble. For all the human insecurities, faults, uncertainties, weaknesses and the constant need to raise questions about sacred and profane are treated with sympathy, respect and deep affection.

I could easily read “The Satanic Verses” over and over again without ever exhausting all of its substance or growing tired of it.

From the archives: September 27 1988

The Satanic Verses, the controversial first draft of the Quran recently discovered after spending 1379 years in a safe deposit box, finally appeared yesterday to a mixed reception.

"Wheeeeee! I'm so excited!!" said one fan who had spent all night lining up outside her local Barnes & Noble. "A new book by Allah! Can you believe it?!"

Other readers are however less enthusiastic about the novel, and take exception to its portrayal of the much-loved character Mohammad as a lecherous smalltime crook. Influential blogger AyatollahK has been particularly outspoken. "Allah never intended this book to be published," he said yesterday in a tersely worded post. "Salman Rushdie and HarperCollins are agents of Shaitan and will be hunted down like dogs."

I love magical realism, so there is plenty to enjoy in this famous novel. The writing is complex and entertaining, but I don't have the necessary background to judge or even understand the blasphemous parts.

There are 3 stories -- a main story and a couple of confusing dream stories that are probably what pissed off Muslim religious leaders. The main storyline looks at life in Bombay, London, national identity, racism, mental illness, faith, family, love, and everything. It is filled with magic, reincarnation and interesting characters. I really liked the devil and angel characters.... it was mostly impossible to tell who was good and who was evil. The dream bits are probably what transforms an entertaining book into great literature.....lots of parallels and deep meanings that I was too lazy to dig out.

Favorite Quote: "The universe was a place of wonders, and only habituation, the anaesthesia of the everyday, dulled our sight."

Read for Banned Book Week.

This novel caused such commotion when it was published, that it's famous for that rather than its content. Its very existence caused the death of a man and the nearly lethal injury of another, while Rushdie had to change his name and remain hidden for many years after Khomeini pronounced a death sentence on the author in 1989. What with the religious fanaticism of the Muslims, I think that Rushdie could have predicted what would follow. However, all this is by no means proof of the book's literary importance, since the latter is, of course, subject to things quite different than religious and social provocations.

First of all, while it is certainly unique in style and technique, I didn't find it so hard to follow as many have suggested, although I recognize that, ignorant as I am of most things concerning the eastern history and tradition, I was bound to miss many implications that were definitely there, despite the helpful footnotes every now and then. Therefore, one could say I missed a large part of the novel's essence. That said, I think that The Satanic Verses could now be considered a timeless, classic saga that makes social and religious prejudice and pretentiousness meet in an extremely witty, allegorical way, if only it was written differently. The reason I don't consider it such, is that I found it excessively garrulous, with Rushdie throwing in numerous useless details that tired me at some point and made me want to just get it over with. A fact that, towards the end, made me feel like he lost the point somewhere. Or maybe I did.

Despite all that, I found it fun and interesting, if a bit demanding, and definitely worthy of my time. A classic case of 3 stars.

The Satanic Verses is vastly imaginative and creative; it is a force to be reckoned with in the literary world providing you can actually get through it. And there’s the rub because The Satanic Verses is quite possibly the single most confusing piece of fiction I have ever read.

I’m just not sure what happened. And after 500+ pages I feel like a book should leave me with a little more than an overbearing sense of bewilderment. Perhaps if I was more widely read I would have appreciated it more. That being said, I don’t think any reader should even attempt this book unless they have a strong grasp on Islamic theology and the Quran. Otherwise most of the allusions will be wasted on you like they were me.

It’s just so difficult to read without that knowledge base. It drew upon such a huge wealth of myths, religion and stories that it became so hard to follow. Multiple names are used to refer to the same characters and they frequently shifted in and out of the narrative making it hard to focus on the story and discern what the actual story was at any given point. So much of the novel went over my head that by around the half way point I’d lost the thread completely and was just reading a series of seemingly unconnected chapters.

What didn’t help is the fact that I’m also reading Joseph Anton, Rushdie’s biography. The personal relationship between him and his farther is detailed quite extensively throughout and much of Rushdie’s emotions regarding the matter are paralleled here in different forms. I became confused with events that had happened in Rushdie’s life and those that had happened in the fictional account here because they are so strikingly similar. This meant that a confusing novel became even more confusing.

I find the history of the novel, the events that led Rushdie to go into hiding as he feared for his own life, far more interesting than the actual work itself perhaps because I can actually comprehend the facts as they are not veiled in a web of incomprehensible allegory. One day I will come back to this book, not anytime soon; it will be a day when I am more familiar with the texts it discusses and engages with. At least then, I may be able to read it and form a solid opinion of it.

n  For now though, I’ve come to a simple conclusion: this book really isn’t for me, at least, not yet. n

I was massively underwhelmed by this. I have put off and put off reading it, and then I was told by a friend that it was her favourite book, so I thought I'd give it a go, and frankly I wish I hadnt bothered.

I found the writing pretentious, with very little story. It has the potential to be brilliant, as the bones of it is good, but there is so much waffle, rubbish and unnessessary wording that it fast becomes tedious and irritatnig.

That said its made him very rich, so good on him!

I should have read "The Satanic Verses" years ago, when I bought it. Truth be told, its huge and scandalous popularity made me reluctant to read it -- I'm often disappointed by modern mega-bestsellers. Unfortunately, it took the atrocious attack on the writer for me to finally sample his work.

"The Satanic Verses" is a marvelous magic tapestry weaved by a virtuoso genius.

Strangely, its hybrid narrative, where a sharp depiction of contemporary life is interconnected with retelling of sacred mythology, made me think of Bulgakov's "The Master and Margarita".

I'm not going to retell the plot or discuss the characters, so just a few notes on what impressed me most about this book.

1.Salman Rushdie's mastery of writing-- true art, seemingly effortless, like Fred Astaire's dancing.;)

2.His polymathic erudition and the richness of cultural references in the book -- from quantum physics to Walter Matthau and Goldie Hawn to Latin sources to Bollywood, to name just a tiny sample (aka from Hollywood to Bollywood and so much more -- sorry, couldn't help the pun). And these references are always an organic part of the narrative, they don't seem forced or overdone.

3.Salman Rushdie excels both in panoramic scope of his story and in focusing on the most intimate emotions of its characters.

4.There is a lot of wisdom sprinkled around in "The Satanic Verses". For example, I didn't expect to find a quote that would resonate so much with the current war:

A people that has remained convinced of its greatness and invulnerability, that has chosen to believe such a myth in the face of all the evidence, is a people in the grip of a kind of sleep, or madness.

I will be sure to read more of Salman Rushdie's work, and I hope he makes a full recovery and writes new books, to the bitter disappointment of his haters.

P.S. Sam Dastor, who narrates the audio book version, deserves a special mention--just like one of the main characters of the book, he is "the man of a thousand voices". Superb narration, worthy of the superb text.

My fellow book lovers, I have a confession to make—I am utterly ashamed of myself for not having read any of Salman Rushdie’s work before this year. In my oversight, I was unknowingly depriving myself of so very much.
This is the second Rushdie book I have now read, the first being “The Enchantress of Florence,” which is also an astonishing, brilliant work.

The Satanic Verses: Most everyone has heard something about the controversy surrounding this infamous tome. Yes, it is a widely banned book, it inflamed the ire of Ayatollah Khomeni and many other Muslims, it caused Rushdie to go into hiding for a decade, and it ultimately inspired the assassination of the Japanese translator and attempts on the lives of other translators, and an assassination attempt on the author himself earlier this year.

But what of the book itself? It is dense. Sprawling. Resplendent with memorable characters. Full of fantastical dreamy magic. Funny at times. Chock full of forays and insights into a myriad of topics, including Indian culture, British culture, ancient Middle Eastern culture, modern celebrity culture, relationships, theology, psychology, philosophy, history, literary references, and more. Rushdie’s erudition is almost blinding. There’s just so much to chew on here—this is truly a feast for the senses and the intellect.

This is a Book with a capital B. It is a Book to be read and re-read, and to be marveled at. My advice is to read it sometime before you take the Great Dirt Nap.

For eight days we wrestled. "The Satanic Verses" and I locked in heaving struggle. At times it nearly escaped as I chased it uphill, my straining hand holding fast its heel as it wriggled; then I myself would seek respite from the battle, clutching for the out-of-bounds only to be pulled back in. But we finished the struggle, and were better for it.

"The Satanic Verses" is, I suspect, one of the most unread of best-sellers. It is, indeed, a cantankerous beast with sections that one must slog through, but overall I think its reputation for impenetrability is somewhat undeserved.

The novel deals with migration, intermingling, hybridization of people, religion. The novel opens with two Indian actors with British ties and sensibilities falling from a plane blown up by terrorists over England. One, Gabreel Farishta, apparently comes to Earth as the archangel Gabreel (or its avatar), wearing a golden halo. The other, Saladin Chamcha, grows into a horned, hoofed devil. The two try to come to grips with their (temporarily) changed forms and try to cope with the struggles of life, their pasts and their relationships, romantic and familial. Gabreel experiences dreams in which he apparently is the angel he seems to be. This includes Rushdie's recreation/alteration of the prophet Muhammad's (here Mahound) supposed divine revelations, the Satanic verses of the title, and whether Mahound has himself altered these verses.

Gabreel has modern visions, as well; he supposedly inspires a village to make a pilgrimage to Mecca in which the people will cross the Arabian Sea, which they think will part for them.

When Rushdie first moves to the story of Mahound, the novel hits, temporarily, a brick wall that I was tempted not to clamber over. It is slow and disorienting at first. Our second visit to this vision, later, is much more involving. And the stories of Ayesha and her village's modern pilgrimage is by turns ponderous and incredibly beautiful (butterflies follow them, lighting on Ayesha like a blanket).

I expected to be baffled by what exactly was happening at times. I really wasn't; my problems in comprehension dealt more with just exactly what Rushdie was up to. Though I see the interconnectedness of the past and present visions and the story of Gabreel and Saladin (who slowly plots a revenge on Gabreel after the two have been separated in the wake of their miraculous fall to Earth), I occasionally was confused by just how Rushdie wanted us to relate them to each other. Just what is Rushdie, in the overall, going on about?

I really think Rushdie (and this novel in particular) would benefit greatly from end notes. Just as, with old classics, we might not in modern times understand archaic words or objects, so the non-Indian (or Britain-ized Indian) probably doesn't have a good understanding of Indian words or, particularly for me, Islam. Annotated edition, anyone?

It's hard to separate "The Satanic Verses" from the fatwa declared on its author that put him in fear for his life for many years. It contributed greatly to its readership (or those who owned it in curiosity and soon gave up on reading it at all). I don't claim to know much about Islam or Muhammad, though calling for someone's death because of a few small scenes in a novel seems, er, a tad extreme.

"The Satanic Verses" is a sprawling and voluminous creature. I don't think it, on the whole, is great. A paring down and a sharper focus would have helped. But Rushdie is one hell of a writer; that's what carried the day for me. If I missed some of the nuances of how all of it tied together, I delighted in Rushdie's use of language, and there are several moving scenes. A section late in the book at the death bed of a character is just lovely.

Would I recommend the book to others? Maybe. But NOT if: this is your first Rushdie (try "Midnight's Children"); you want a linear, easily comprehensible plot; you get frustrated when the plot doesn't to go where you want it to; you have to understand everything; you are impatient. Otherwise, if you're adventurous, have a go.

I liked it more than I thought I would. Rushdie is a bit exceedingly heavy-handed with the symbolism (I mean, Indian expatriate who denies his Indian roots turns into the incarnation of evil? Come on!), but makes up for it by his pungent prose. Beware though. If sentences like, "Exit Pimple, weeping, censored, a scrap on a cutting-room floor." or "Here he is neither Mahomet nor MoeHammered; has adopted, instead, the demon-tag the farangis hung around his neck." make you cringe then you'll want to avoid this like the plague. But if you find it bracingly different, then plunge right in. An Indian magic realist look at racism, identity, religion, and redemption.