Unfortunately, most people know this book from the scandal and fatwa it generated around the personage of its prolific and outspoken author Salman Rushdie rather than the book itself. The thing that enraged some Muslims (and the Ayatollah of Iran most of all) was Rushdie's hypothesis that Mohammed, being completely illiterate and having the Qu'ran being narrated to him by Archangel Gabriel could have dozed off at one point and that Satan could have impersonated Gabriel without Mohammed noticing causing some verses of the Holy Book to be written by him. That's it. Just a theory. No more than when Kazantzakis imagines Jesus fantasising about accepting Mary Magdalene's sexual advances. In Rushdie's book, this is not even the main story, just an internal narrative in a dream of a character that falls out of an airplane of all things. The book is highly imaginative and although I preferred Midnight's Children and The Moor's Last Sigh, remains for me one of his best works. So read it if for any other reason as to oppose censorship and support artistic freedom and artistic license. Especially in these days of religious fanaticism, books like Satanic Verses which challenge the status quo and force us to re-evaluate our values and idées reçu are incredibly important.

Після, відверто кажучи, не просто ганебної, а ще й, що гірше, бездарної автобіографії Салмана Рушді я геть забула, які в нього бувають блискучі тексти - а дарма. Бо "Сатанинські вірші" я шалено люблю - в їхній вербальній надмірності, в їхньому змішуванні магічного реалізму з британською соціальною драмою, імігранти везуть демонів з-під старих небес, не декларуючи на кордоні, імігранти перетворюються на демонів, бо такими їх бачать місцеві, світом вештають безумні пророки й ті, хто прикидаються безумними пророками, а у Сатани завжди найкращі вірші. Ну прегарний же роман.
Треба ще "Ганьбу" перечитати.

“Soll er das Werkzeug des Zornes Gottes werden? Oder seiner Liebe? Ist er Rache oder Vergebung? ... (Ich gebe ihm keine Anweisungen. Auch ich warte mit Interesse darauf, wie er sich entscheiden wird- auf das Ergebnis seines Ringkampfes. Charakter gegen Vorbestimmung...)” (S. 597)

Аутор анализира ислам и долази до закључка да је то религија покоравања, која садржи само оне делове које се Мухамед презентовао својим пратиоцима, у форми у којој му је арханђео Џибрил у пећини рекао. Али да ли управо тако било? Ипак је Божји пророк само човек. Можда су то, ипак, само Мухамедове опсервације? Можда у пећини у коју је повремено одлазио Мухамед сем њега самог није било никог другог? Ипак је Мумадед био трговац, додуше поштен. Са друге стране аутор књиге се са благонаклоношћу односи према женским богињама у исламу, које не заузимају места која би им по значењу припадала, јер им људи нису наклоњени. Сада, када сам прочитао књигу, не чуди ме да је Салмана Руждија ирански верски вођа Хомеини 'осудио на смрт', односно изрекао је фатву, јер је управо ову књигу окарактерисао као дело које говори 'против ислама, Мухамеда и Курана'.

Having just finished The Satanic Verses I'm not quite sure what to make of it. I found it to be well written and descriptive for the most part, but at times, hard to understand and boring. It definitely got more interesting for me nearer the end, when the plot lines started coming together a little more.

Rating: 3/5 stars

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…”

What kind of idea are you?

This question, scattered throughout the pages of this novel, is the intermediary between the author and his work. A waterloo of sorts, a windbreaker giving rise to the question of the material’s purpose. It gives us some sort of glimpse as to why he chose to name it “Satanic Verses”, insight to all its diabolical implications, and some sort of motive as to why it is disrespectful to Islam and the Prophet. So what kind of an idea is this? In turn, what kind of idea are we? It is said that people are only the sum of their ideas and beliefs. So what equaled to our sum? What are we made of?

Are you a preconceived idea?

When does the bias of the material end and when does the bias of the reader begin? If you’re either a Christian or a Muslim, then surely the title of this novel made you pause, if only a little. Or maybe it drove you off altogether. I assure you this novel is not satanic in any devilish way. Now I ask the question: Do we really approach a book with an open mind, or do we give immediate judgment to books based on their titles? Do we read without bias or do we bear impasse to fairness. Do we aim to learn or do we aim to protect our knowledge? These questions, I believe, are critical when discussing reading materials which are controversial in nature. It occurred to me when, during an article review in one of my classes, my group-mates and I discussed the bias of an article about the Gaza affair. My groupmates interpreted the article in favor of Israel while I, on the other hand, viewed it a bit sympathetic towards Palestinians. I realized then that when it came to issues we have forehand knowledge of; people tend to see what they want to see. Justification of its stand is the priority of the mind rather than the absorption of new information. This selective receiving, blindsiding whatever parity the material has, is a greater source of misconstrusion rather than biased material. Sure, there will always be certain biases in all materials we read, but the bias of the mind is the sieve through which comprehension passes, it will only let in biases it supports. This greatly affects one’s comprehension into the mold it wants to see. The bias of a material will be evident to an open mind, but the bias of a reader will affect even the most unbiased material. A good example is the reading of the Bible. The Bible is the foundation of Christianity. Everything that Christians believe in come from that book, but I believe it was Isaac Asimov who said “Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived.” It only shows that one’s biases are the hands that mold one’s reading experience. People’s understanding is founded on the guidance of certain assumptions and axioms based on previous knowledge, but this principle can also be taken to an extreme. This “learned” mindset which has become second-nature to us, is a great hindrance to critical thinking and knowledge acquisition. Even the most gifted mind is beset by this problem, and I believe it takes years of practice to be able to read something without any inclinations.

So before you read this novel, I beg that you give a conscious effort to be open-minded and at least try to suppress the inevitable biases that you will have. A full cup will spill all that’s poured into it, be an empty cup. Only then can one learn to fully appreciate this novel.

Different Ideast

Salman Rushdie’s novel is a multi-layered magical tale with lots of possible implications. Its many facets, much like a dice that can roll to many of its sides, may have different meanings or might be driving together at one main point. It’s hard to really pin-point the central theme of the novel. The author suggests that it is about migration and the problems that immigrants face, which is most obvious during Chamcha’s early metamorphism. The notion of “nationalism” and betrayal of one’s country is thereby tackled. But then Mahound’s, the Butterfly Girl’s, and the Immam’s respective arcs try to bring perspective to blind faith. Baal’s tale warns one of trying to be someone else. The Old Woman’s and Rehka Merhcant’s respective accounts tell us not to devote our purpose to another person. The terrorist’s example hints mockery in self-sacrifice. Farishta’s bizarre experiences advises us to not to be fooled by destiny or purpose. Alleluia’s case conveys that uprightness is not always rewarded. The whole “immigrant mob” incident showcases that the mob mentality is not always right. Many possible ideas are present, one can choose which to focus on, which to ignore, which to accept. Which I idea are you?

My idea

For me, the main idea of this novel is learning to understand that one must create one’s own ideas. If you will notice, all the facets and interwoven tales are delved in problems when the characters place their life, their ideas on nationalism, faith, someone they want to be like, someone they love, on political beliefs, on destiny, on goodwill, on what everybody does. We are busy with these worldviews that we then ignore the question “What are my own ideas?” “Who am I apart from these things not of my own?”

“WHAT KIND OF AN IDEA ARE YOU?”

“Are you the kind that compromises, does deals, accommodates 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 a hundred, be smashed to bits; but, the hundredth time, will change the world."

A bit of a cliché, I know. But one can’t avoid the reality of what this says. Are your ideas your own, or were they placed there by society? Creativity, originality, uniqueness these things are being suppressed by a society that calls for conformity, for belongingness. What kind of idea will you be?

The World's Ideas

“Society was orchestrated by what she called ‘grand narratives’: history, economics, ethics. In India, the development of a corrupt and closed state apparatus had ‘excluded the masses of the people from the ethical project’. As a result, they sought ethical satisfactions in the oldest of the grand narratives, that is, religious faith. But these narratives are being manipulated by the theocracy and various political elements in an entirely retrogressive way.”

“We can’t deny the ubiquity of faith. If we write in such a way as to pre-judge such belief as in some way deluded or false, then are we not guilty of elitism, of imposing our world-view on the masses?”

Worldviews, social constructs, axioms, these are also important as much as one’s individuality. For one must take into account that one’s self interest doesn’t give one the right to step on another. “Let our aim be a way of life not diametrically opposed to, but better than that of the mob. Otherwise we shall repel and alienate the very people whose reform we should desire.” I understand Salman Rushdie was disrespectful to Islam and to Muhammad, shouldn’t he have been? It is not for me to say. It was his choice, and I refuse to cast another stone where I am but an observer. But who are we to say that he deserves to die for his unbelief? It is one thing to ask for an apology, and another to take life altogether. Why should a review get deleted when it says bad things about an author? Free Expression is commendable but one must also remember repercussions. Acts are done in the name of ideas. Be careful what ideas you clash with, you embody, for unlike an idea which can change, the associated action cannot be taken back. The Fatwa placed on Rushdie’s head speaks the truth about how conforming the world asks us to be, how the actuality of ideas cannot be undone. But sometimes, just sometimes, the realization stemmed from one person’s ideas changes the world for the greater good. Will the possibility of criticism deter your idea?

What kind of idea are you?

Be your own kind of idea, think critically, question everything, don’t be a passive receiver, be open-minded, be creative, unique, but also learn to respect ideas that are not your own.

Salman Rushdie’s magical realism breaks tradition with modern Indian literature, which is firmly rooted in the broad brush-strokes of Anglo Saxon realism and linear narrative techniques-the brush-strokes which form ‘The Satanic Verses’ is a composite of post-modern authors-from the metafiction of Calvino, to the use of fantastical characters and situations of Marquez, the punning and solecisms of Nabokov and intertexuality of Borges. Rushdie is a writer whose roots are spread across a myriad of writers, from which flowers Rushdie’s opus, ‘The Satanic Verses’.

The story follows the diffident and narcissistic Bollywood star Gibreel and Chamcha, a voice actor residing in London. The pair are magically transformed into the angel Gabriel (Gibreel) and Satan (Chamcha) following the explosion of a plane they are travelling on over the English Channel. Yet Gibreel’s transformation is more symptom of his deteriorating mental health and narcissistic tendencies after years of constant adulation cause him to loose his sense of reality, his life a haze of halitosis and sexual conquests in his mind he has become on of deities he used to play in his early films. Chamca meanwhile as a man who is literary uncomfortable in his own skin-his sense of Indianess is a heavy load on his shoulders as he strives to integrate into a society who will never accept him until he sheds the last vestiges of his culture. In many ways ‘The Satanic Verses’ is a novel about the difficulties of integration as an immigrant, the deep-rooted prejudices which still exist in the Western world and the continued after effects of colonialism.

The novel, however is equally critical of the superficial glibness of Bollywood and the worst excessed of religion-in this case Islam-in fostering division and fundamentalism. Rushdie is however able to imbue the novel with irony and humour, beneath which lies a parable about integration, the spiritual emptiness of religious dogma and a criticism of both Western and Indian materialism.

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.

I have been trying to read this book day by day by day and just cannot get into it. I tried when it was published, put it aside for another day. Tried again many years later. This will have to be my pen-ultimate effort, I hope.

The writing is well done. Eloquent. Impressive. But apart from that there's nothing else gripping me to a point where I want to leave everything else and bed down with this book. The subject simply does not mesmerize me enough.

Will try again later.

تعرفت على سلمان رشدي من خلال أحمد ديدات وبالضبط من خلال أحد كتبه التي كانت تحتويها مكتبة والدي والذي كان يحمل عنوان " شيطانية الآيات الشيطانية"0
لا أنكر أنني منذ سنوات و أول ما عرفت أن هناك من قام بتأليف كتاب معنون بآيات شيطانية تملكني الرعب واحسست القشعريرة تسري في كامل بدني، وعزفت عن قراءة الكتاب أو أي كتب أخرى للكاتب حتى رواية أطفال منتصف الليل التي قيل أنها من أروع الروايات،
بعد سنوات أحست أنني بتصرفي هذا لا أقل تفاهة عن المتعصبين والمتشددين لأي فكرة مهما كانت خلفياتها..
حاليا أنا أؤمن بالإبداع أيا كان ومن أي كان، وهنا أشدد الإبداع وليس الهراء..
ولو كنت أدري أن هذه الرواية التي أقامت الدنيا وأقعدتها ستكون بهذا المستوى الردئ لما صبرت عنها كل هذه المدة، ولو بوسعي الآن أن أقول شيئا فليس لي سوى جملة واحدة: " لو عرف المسلمون مدى تفاهة هذه الرواية لما جعلوا كاتبها يلعو ويشتهر بتلك الطريقة الجنونية/ إننا ولا شك نحن من نصنع الألقاب للناس"0
هنا على ويكيبيديا معلومات أكثر وأوفر لكن لفتني أكثر وشدتني كثيرا ردود الفعل، فعلا مهزلة
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A2%...

قرأت الرواية لأن صديقة لي مثقفة أخبرتني أن الكاتب سلمان رشدي انتقد في هذه الرواية آيات إيران.
طبعًا ما صدقتها لكنها أصرت أن سلمان رشدي كان ينتقدهم لذلك اهدروا دمه.

فوجئت بمدى قباحة هذا العمل، رواية بذيئة جِدًّا تسيء للرسول عليه أفضل الصلاة والسلام ولزوجاتهِ الطاهرات أمهات المؤمنين.